| Comment Number: | 522418-10155 |
| Received: | 7/15/2006 8:21:23 PM |
| Organization: | Wellness International Network Ltd. |
| Commenter: | April Wagner |
| State: | FL |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Re: Business Opportunity Rule, R511993 Dear Sir or Madam, I express my strong opposition to the proposed Business Opportunity Rule R511993, the rule as proposed would make it very difficult for me to operate my business as an independent distributor for Wellness International Network. Ltd. One of the most confusing and burdensome sections of the proposed rule is the 7 day waiting period to enroll new distributors. Wellness International requires a completed distributor application for distributors to sell products, the personal purchase is strickly optional. Wellness International System for Success only cost $99 and provides valuable marketing materials and communications tools - weekly newletters, quarterly magazines, a personal website and shopping cart to name a few of the benefits. The cost of Wellness International's application fee is far less than many, if not most, consumer purchases, from TV's to all manner of household appliances, none of which require a 7 day waiting period and do not provide an opportunity for a person to be come a business owner. The proposed rule requires the disclosure of a minimum of 10 prior purchasers nearest to the prospective purchaser. In this day of identity theft, I am uncomfortable giving out the personal information of the other WIN distributors, without their knowledge or consent, to strangers. I understand that those who sign up after the rule takes effect would be told in writing. "If you buy a business opportunity from the seller, your contact information can be disclosed in the future to other buyers" I believe that this would dissuade new people from signing up as distributors as they are concerned not only about identity theft, but also about their privacy. Providing the ten references also could damage the businesses of numerous Wellness International distributors. Lower ranking distributors often are involved in more than one direct-selling company. Provinding a list to a potential recruit - who may already be a distributor for a competing direct-selling company - may be an invitation to solicit existing distributors for such other opportunities. The 10 reference requiremnt also is an administrative burden. In order to obtain the list of 10 prior purchases, I will need to provide Wellness International with the prospective distributor's address and then wait to receive the list of the 10 nearest distributors who became distributors within the past three years. Each prospective recruit will need a customized disclosure statement. This will result in a delay far longer than 7 calendar days before any potential recruit can sign an application. In view of the fact that many people enter direct-selling part-time to earn extra money for a specific goal, such as holiday purcahses or a family vacation: the long wait which the proposed rule will may make the goal unattainable. The proposed rule calls for the release of any information regarding lawsuits that allege misrepresentation or unfair or deceptive practices over a ten year period. It does not matter if the company was found innocent or not liable. Almost all business lawsuits contain claims of misrepresentation or unfair competition. It does not make sense to me that I would have to disclose the lawsuits unless Wellness International, or its officers, direct ors or sales department employess, have been found guilty or liable. A 14 yr old company such as Wellness International and their distributors would be placed at a disadvantage compared to start-up, direct-selling companies, which may not yet have experienced litigation but which are far more likely to have liegal issues surrounding their opportunites. I have been a Wellness International distributor for 13 years. I became a distributor because I love the company's product line and needed to replace my husbands income. We now depend on this business for our livelihood. I believe this proposed rule has unintended consequences. AprilWagner