| Comment Number: | 522418-11487 |
| Received: | 7/17/2006 12:21:30 PM |
| Organization: | |
| Commenter: | Donna Terrence |
| State: | NC |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
RE: Business Opportunity Rule, R511993 Dear Federal Trade Commission: It has been my privilege to participate in the direct sales industry for more than a decade, working part time, and recently full time, from the comfort of my own home. My current association with XanGo, LLC, has been the highlight of my career and a source of great satisfaction and pride. While I am sure the FTC has the best interests of American consumers at heart, I wonder if those responsible for writing these proposed rule changes have ever owned or operated a small business themselves. Here are my comments on some of the items in the proposed rule: 1- SEVEN-DAY WAITING PERIOD: This might make sense if a large sum of money was involved, such as with a franchise operation. However, our company, like many others in our industry, charges a very small administrative enrollment fee (in our case, $35) to establish a distributorship. Also, our product carries a money-back guarantee. Requiring a 7-day waiting period for such a small purchase would raise unnecessary and undeserved red flags in the minds of our potential customers and business associates. The people at whom this rule is aimed would simply ignore it, while legitimate businesses such as mine would find it crippling. 2- ELIMINATION OF THE $500 BUSINESS THRESHOLD: The paragraph above contains many of the reasons why this rule does not match up with our business model. Our company, along with many others, simply does not belong in the same category as a company to whom the current $500 threshold applies. 3- LIST OF NEAREST REFERENCES: I was amazed to read this section. As a consumer, I am alarmed at the lack of respect for the privacy of my personal information in the marketplace. As a wellness product distributor, I would consider it grossly unethical to reveal my customers' personal data to strangers! This rule forces customers into the untenable position of being forced to sacrifice their consumer privacy in order to purchase a product that might enhance their quality of life. The result -- both consumers and honest business owners will be harmed while fraudulent operators sail blithely on with made-up reference lists. 4- EARNINGS CLAIM STATEMENT: While it is a good thing to require substantiation of earnings claims, fly-by-night outfits will simply offer inaccurate data while honest business people would have to struggle mightily to meet the unduly stringent requirements being proposed for this rule. 5- LEGAL ACTIONS: In our world today, frivolous and even malevolent legal filings are becoming commonplace. Since this rule makes no distinction between the winning or losing of a lawsuit, it has the effect of unnecessarily tarnishing the reputation of a company that has successfully defended against a legal attack. --------- Many of the disclosures being considered in these rule changes are not required for other business categories, which is patently unfair. The complexity of these regulations will be a nightmare to enforce as well as practically impossible for law-abiding small business owners to follow properly. Literally millions of hard working, tax paying citizens will be harmed by these rules while unscrupulous people will be untouched. Please allow real world business experience to guide you to better solutions for the marketplace problems you are trying to address! Thank you for considering these points in your deliberations. Sincerely, Donna Terrence Greensboro, NC