<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC '-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN'>

<html><head><title>534660-00017.htm</title>

<meta name='vs_defaultClientScript' content='JavaScript'>

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">

<meta name='vs_targetSchema' content='http://schemas.microsoft.com/intellisense/ie3-2nav3-0'>

<meta name='Originator' content='CommentWorks'></head><body><Table>

<tr><td><b>Comment Number: </b></td><td>534660-00017</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>Received: </b></td><td>8/12/2008 4:27:33 PM</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>Organization: </b></td><td>Haydon &amp; Company</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>Commenter: </b></td><td>Kenneth Haydon</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>State: </b></td><td>NC</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>Agency: </b></td><td>Federal Trade Commission</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>Rule: </b></td><td>Guides for the Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries</td></tr>

<tr><td>No Attachments</tr></Table>

<hr><P><b>Comments:</b></p>I am opposed any proposition of amending the use of the term Platinum as it is defined presently.  I have been in the jewelry industry for over thirty years and have found that abuse of loosely defined terms cause for mis-understanding from both jewelers and consumers.  I believe that this proposition will only compound the confusion in an industry that has enough confusion already.


The new alloyed metals can be described as to what the alloys are, leaving no room for misunderstanding on the part of the consumer.</body></html>