| Comment Number: | 522418-02066 |
| Received: | 6/13/2006 11:00:44 PM |
| Organization: | Synergy Worldwide |
| Commenter: | Chris Henderson |
| State: | CO |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Dear Sir or Madam, My wife Jaimee and I are writing this letter because we are concerned that if the proposed Business Opportunity Rule R511993 is adopted in its present form, our livelihood as Synergy WorldWide distributors will be significantly undermined. The public is not well served by having the FTC over regulate an industry that is causing absolutely no harm and more than adequately polices itself by remedying any and all complaints by members of the public. Our company, Synergy WorldWide complies with all applicable buy-back requirements and always makes it easy for individuals to exit the Company, if the business opportunity is not right for them. While the FTC needs to protect the public where necessary, this proposed rule is hopelessly overbroad and misguided. Without question, the infamous "Rule of Unintended Consequences" will be the one, and probably only, result of this proposal! The seven-day waiting period is unnecessary and will interfere with our ability to enter into lawful transactions and enroll new distributors. People buy TVs, cars, and other much more costly items without such a waiting period. Perhaps worst of all, this proposed waiting period gives the impression that something is wrong with direct selling, and infers that people are not capable of making appropriate decisions for themselves in less than 7 days. How stupid is that!? And, the burdensome paperwork, which will not even be read by the public, makes it extremely difficult for the individual participant to fully comply, thereby risking fines and other penalties for such failures, however innocent. By these actions, the FTC does a disservice to the consuming public and Americans everywhere who are trying to get ahead by starting their own business, or adding necessary supplemental income to their family. While we appreciate the attempt by the FTC to protect consumers, this proposed new rule has many unintended consequences and is more a knee-jerk reaction than a serious and legitimate attempt to "protect" the public. Please, please do not make this terrible mistake. Thank you for your time in considering our comments. Sincerely yours, Chris and Jaimee Henderson