| Comment Number: | 522418-05228 |
| Received: | 6/30/2006 6:50:08 AM |
| Organization: | |
| Commenter: | A Nagata |
| State: | HI |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Hello, I am a business owner in the Quixtar business and have been for a number of years. Upon hearing about the proposal to add a rule for business opportunities, I had some mixed feelings. I agree that certain practices could help distinguish legitimate business opportunites from illegal opportunities. I am all for this. However, there are several points in the proposed law which would be more harmful or unnecessarily cumbersome for legitimate business owners. Having a seven day waiting period before a prospect could register seems to limit a person's freedom of choice. Instead of this limitation, I would suggest a reasonable money-back guarantee period between 14-31 days. Requiring disclosure of lawsuits and litigation of the company in question also seems quite cumberesome. This may not be a problem for startup companies, but any company which has been around for a number of years will no doubt accumulate a number of law suits both reasonable and unfounded. To require disclosure of all this litigation is unreasonable for many companies. The burden of proof should lie with the prospect seeking the opportunity rather than the business owner. Finally, providing 10 references to the prospect may be a good practice and show of good faith, but really doesn't prove anything or substantiate a business opportunity. There are good websites like hoovers.com which would be better resources than references which could be falsified. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, A Nagata