| Comment Number: | 522418-07066 |
| Received: | 7/8/2006 11:45:23 PM |
| Organization: | Wm Thornton Organization |
| Commenter: | William Thornton |
| State: | TX |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
William I. Thornton Date: 8July2006 Federal Trade Commission Office of the Secretary Room H-135 (Annex W) 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20580 Re: Business Opportunity Rule, R511993 Gentlemen: 1. I am writing this letter because my personal disgust with the proposed Business Opportunity Rule R511993. I believe that, as it's presented, It is unconstitutional and completely out-of-touch with current U.S. economics. It would prevent me from continuing as an Independent XanGo Distributor. It would literally destroy my business. I have been an independent home-based business Distributor for 10 years. Originally, I started my Independent Sales and Network Marketing businesses because of my expertise and the products. I wanted to earn additional income for my retirement. Now, after becoming disabled following diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis, I depend on this income to provide 100% of my Social Security budget. Please don’t instigate this wholly-unnecessary Rule to destroy my business. I depend on it! 2. Some of the sections in the proposed rule would make it virtually impossible for me to sell my product. a. The waiting period will give the public the idea that there’s something wrong with me or our plan and also reflects badly on me. The seven-day waiting period is totally unnecessary, because XanGo already has a 100% buyback policy for its one single product. b. One of the most difficult sections of the proposed rule is the seven day waiting period to enroll a new Distributor. XanGo’s sales kit only costs $35. People buy TVs, cars, and other items that cost much more than that and they don’t have to wait seven-days. Under this waiting period requirement, I will need to keep very detailed records when I first speak to someone a prospect and will then have to send in reports to my company. I am a single practitioner and small home business owner. This burden will literally destroy my business. This proposed rule is actually anti-small business. c. Finally, the proposed rule requires the disclosure of a minimum of 10 prior purchasers nearest to the prospective purchaser. I am glad to provide references, but in this day of identity theft, I am very uncomfortable giving out the personal information of individuals (without their approval) to strangers. Women in my organization may be subject to sexual or racial harassment so this part can’t go in at all, unless the FTC passes an addition to this rule prohibiting sexual or racial attacks related to this disclosure. In the end the rule must bind the FTC to take direct enforcement action on sexual and racial attacks with a special unit assigned to monitor actions related to the disclosure forms. Again … this unconstitutional. d. I have seen many scams on the Internet and been approached by many crooks because of my success. This rule will do nothing to stop them. This rule will not stop crooks – they violate the current rule all the time. But I am a good American citizen and it will hurt me. In summary, whoever in FTC's bureaucracy developed this totally-unnecessary "Rule" proposal should be fired immediately. I am totally in-favor of a free-market economy ... NOT more unnecessary governmental control. Concerned Citizen, William I. Thornton Independent XanGo Distributor