|Received:||7/6/2006 10:50:49 PM|
|Subject:||Business Opportunity Rule|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 437|
Comments:For the sake of brevity, I will forego pomp and rhetoric. I could appreciate the proposed changes the FTC wishes to make, if they could conceivably make any POSITIVE difference in our business, the industry as a whole, or business in general. Unfortunately, nothing that is proposed will assist ANYONE in making a more informed decision, have more commitment to their own success, or prevent abuses by any individual or group of individuals. Specifically: the seven day waiting period: Buying a house or car only has a three day window to recant. I registered in the business the day I saw the opportunity. Why? Because I was working two jobs, was so deep in debt that being broke would have been an improvement and I was looking for some way out of my situation. This business offered me that opportunity for less than the cost of going out for dinner and a movie. (I have been an IBO for approximately 5 years, I’ve paid off two vehicles, eliminated 5 credit cards and the debt that was hanging over me and have a better marriage and family life than ever!) The waiting period should be relative to the risk involved. There should be a seven day waiting period on buying a lottery ticket before there is any waiting period on registering with Quixtar. At least with Quixtar, if you decide you don’t want to work to achieve your dreams, you can get your money back. The requirement to provide references: my doctors didn’t have to provide references, and I trust them with my life. My mechanic didn’t have to provide references and I trust him with my vehicles (and therefore, my life). When I go to a new restaurant, they don’t have to provide references, and I’m eating in their establishment (and thereby risking my life). How does ANY new business provide references? This proposed rule defies logic. The FCC would have to take every commercial ever made about anyone starting a business off the air. Every success story out there reflects that it is the integrity and performance of individuals and companies over time that proves their worth – NOT talking heads or “references”. Sam Walton would have never gotten started. Ray Kroc would have been dead in the water. Bill Gates would have just been another college drop out. The proposed rule to provide a litigation list? Is that even serious? We live in a country where frivolous lawsuits are not a crime. Any bitter-beer faced whiner can launch a lawsuit, regardless of merit. And what if you missed mentioning one? Would that be grounds for a lawsuit? This is not even in the realm of reasonable. I have NEVER seen or heard of anyone being required to disclose their income unless they are trying to borrow money. Since we are not borrowing money from our prospects and potential associates, how much money we make is none of their business. Every job, every TV commercial, every thing I’ve ever seen regarding income, ESPECIALLY any advertisement for a college or technical degree has ALWAYS come with the disclaimer that “results may vary, your results may be different”. Fortunately, Quixtar has a schedule of earnings potential that is realistic and believable. Do I need proof? No. I’ve never asked an employer to provide proof of what my supervisor was making in the off chance that I might one day be promoted to his position. With all due respect, I am at a complete loss as to what any of the proposed rules are designed to accomplish. It has been my experience both inside and outside this business that you cannot legislate morality, integrity, character, honesty, or any other virtue. There is no way to make any system, business or other, totally ‘vermin’ proof. Those who would seek to achieve their success at the expense of any other person will always find ways to do their damage.