|Received:||6/4/2006 4:23:45 PM|
|Subject:||Business Opportunity Rule|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 437|
Comments:Dear Sir or Madam: I am writing to express my strong opposition to the Business Opportunity Rule R511993. I appreciate the FTC's effort to protect the public from unfair and deceptive acts or practices, but I propose that the FTC go after the 10%-20% of the business that are not in compliance instead of impacting the 90% complying to ethical business practices. One burdensome section is the 7-day waiting period to enroll new distributors. Most who sign up with Shaklee are solely for consumer purchases. If they later wish to build a business, Shaklee request their Social Security or Tax ID Number. The Shaklee Member Kit cost only $19.95, far less then most comsumer purchases. Purshasing from TV to all manner of household appliances non of which require a seven-day waiting period. And Shaklee already has a 90% buyback policy for products including the Member Kit. Shaklee is an extremely ethical company that is why I decided to join 5 years ago. I know that if you looked into the Shaklee Corporation you too would only want to take their products, where you can be sure you are getting safe ingredients instead of buying through the TV inframercials where you are unsure -- will they be subject to the unfair and deceptive acts and practices ruling? What is their buy back policy and what recourse do you have if you are unhappy with their products? Can you even find the distributor after you've made a purchase? The proposed rule requires the disclosure of a minimum of 10 prior purchasers nearest to the prospective purchaser. I am uncomfortable giving out the personal information of other Shaklee distributors, even with their knowledge or consent, to strangers. Idenity theft is real and I know I would not like to have my information given out to anyone. This rule would make it difficult if not impossible for me to keep my buiness! The 10 reference requirement also will delay the process of delivering products. By the time Administration gathers the information it will take far longer than 7 calendar days before a potintial recruit can sign and application. In the view that many people enter direct selling part-time to earn extra income, the long wait which the proposed rule will entail may make the goal unattainable. The proposed rule calls for the release of any informaiton regarding lawsuits that allege misrepressentation or unfair or deceptive practices over a 10-year period. It does not matter if the company was found innocent or not liable. It does not make sense to me that I would have to disclose these lawsuits unless Shaklee Corporation, or its officers, directors, or sales department employees have been found guilty or lliable. A 50-year old company would be placed at a great disadvantage compared to a start-up direct selling company which may not yet have experienced litigation but which is far more likely to have legal issues surrounding their opportunities. I have been a Shaklee Distributor for more that 5 years. Originally I became a Shaklee Distributor because I love the company's nutritional/personal care/household products. I use and love them all! I shared my love for the products an wanted to earn some additional income working from home. Now I and my family depend upon this extra income to supplement our budget as I am now retired and NEED the money. Shaklee has been in business for 50 years and is an ethical company...putting blanket restricitons on all companies would make it far more difficult for people doing direct marketing. While I appreicate the work of the FTC to protect consumers, I I believe this proposed new rule have many unintended consequences for direct sellers and that there are less burdensome alternatives available to the agency to achieve its goals. Thank you for your time in considering my comments.