|Received:||7/17/2006 12:31:38 AM|
|Organization:||Quixtar (Yager Organization)|
|Subject:||Business Opportunity Rule|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 437|
Comments:Regarding Business Opportunity Rule #R511993 I have been an Amway/Quixtar IBO for over 10 years. My average business income is about $50 per month. Through the Yager training program, I learned much about leadership, integrity, and people skills. This business is not easy. I have to deal with rejection and embarrassment, when prospects suggest that this is a "pyramid scheme." When I share the opportunity, I show the potential of the business and explain that the rewards are commensurate with productivity. It is not a pyramid, because someone I sponsor can earn more money than I do. We are NOT paid to recruit. We earn commissions on product sales. A seven-day waiting period would essentially kill momentum that is crucial for building this business. People get discouraged when they don't see results right away. People can get into this business for the cost of a dinner for 4 in a nice restaurant. The financial risk is relatively small. I see no reason to act as if they were risking their life savings. Requiring us to provide references, a list of local IBOs, would basically cripple our ability to build in new areas. We don't have territories. For example, while living in New Jersey, I could sponsor a downline in California. Usually, we invite our prospects to open opportunity meetings and seminars, where they can meet our successful "upline" IBO family. IBOs who are not in our group are essentially, our "competition." I would not want to give their names and phone numbers to my prospects. These "crossline cousins" could "steal" or "poach" my prospects. I would prefer to introduce my prospects to my upline mentors who have a vested interest in our success. I would not want crossline IBOs to be giving my name and phone number to their prospects. Talking to them would waste my valuable time. Providing a "litigation list" would be wasteful. Anybody can sue. Even if they don't win, false accusations in print tend to be believed. Disgruntled people may want to take revenge on a specific person. The Quixtar company is an honorable company. Unfortunately, we sometimes sponsor the wrong people. It's just like any other profession: lawyers, police, doctors. Just because one goes bad, does not mean they all are dishonest. Have you ever heard a poor student blame the professor for his failure? The student does not attend class, does not do the reading or the assignments, and blames his failure on the teacher. People who fail in this business are like those who buy an appliance, refuse to read and follow the operating instructions and then complain that the machine does not work. When are we going to allow people to take responsibility for their own actions? I personally know people who have made a lot of money working this business. If I am not as successful as they, it is because I have not done the work. Specific earning disclosures would be meaningless. This business opportunity is not like a union job in which the slacker makes the same wage as the hard-working go-getter. In Quixtar, if we don't produce, we don't get paid. We cannot guarantee anyone else's success based on our own. The Quixtar company publishes the "SA4400," a document that explains how the bonuses are calculated. Earning are based on productivity and vary greatly. Disclosure of my personal income from my Quixtar business would discourage a prospect. I have not put in the necessary time and effort to generate a large income. Someone I sponsor could earn more that I do, if he or she is a more effective salesperson and invests more time and effort in the business. If I sponsor someone who does nothing, disclosure of my income is pointless. They are not going to earn any money, because they have not done the work. A new IBO who is just starting out would be at a disanvantage, if he had to reveal his income. Income from a business takes time. This is not an instant get-rich-quick scheme.