Comment Number: 522418-06986
Received: 7/8/2006 12:16:38 PM
Organization:
Commenter: Jerry Beach
State: OK
Subject: Business Opportunity Rule
Title: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
CFR Citation: 16 CFR Part 437
No Attachments

Comments:

Dear Sir or Madam, Attached are statements made that pretty well cover the personal issues that I and many others have with the proposed Rule R511993. It is recognized by myself and many other Americans who engage in the free enterprise system that there are “bogus” and “fraudulent” business opportunity scams that do not serve the public interest at any level. These should be dealt with in a swift and just manner. However, to place all businesses that operate through multilevel distribution into one category that basically implies that all are unfounded, unfair, and scandalous is unfair, anti-American, and goes against the grain of our cherished free enterprise system that our forefathers so fought and defended for. Millions of people rely on products of all types that are available and sold only through multilevel distribution systems. Many of these products are of a quality difficult to obtain through normal channels and some are not available at all through “normal” channels such as large chain stores, etc.. I and others sincerely hope that you too will consider this proposed rule inappropriate and defeat it in its present format. I am writing this letter because I am concerned that if proposed Business Opportunity Rule R511993 is adopted in its present form, my livelihood as a Nature’s Sunshine distributor will be significantly undermined. The very thought of governmental interference in the free enterprise process strikes fear in the hearts of Americans everywhere. Cherished values are at stake, and the FTC needs to be aware of the dangers of ill considered action. The public is not well served by the FTC’s over regulation of 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. Nature’s Sunshine 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. The seven-day waiting period is unnecessary and will interfere with my ability to enter into lawful transactions and enroll new distributors. People buy TV’s, cars, and other much more costly items without such a waiting period. This proposed waiting period gives the impression that something is wrong with the plan. 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 earning necessary supplemental income to help support their family. While I appreciate the work of the FTC in protecting consumers, I believe this proposed new rule has many unintended consequences that could be avoided by a less burdensome approach. Thank you for your time in considering my comments. Sincerely yours, Jerry D. Beach