| Comment Number: | 522418-01325 |
| Received: | 6/7/2006 4:14:47 PM |
| Organization: | Home & Garden Party |
| Commenter: | Kimberly Jenkins |
| State: | NC |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Dear Sir or Madam, I am writing this letter because I am concerned about the proposed Business Opportunity Rule R511993. I believe that in its present form, it could prevent me from continuing as a Home & Garden Party Designer. I understand that part of the FTC's responsibilities is to protect the public from "unfair and deceptive acts or practices," yet some of the sections in the proposed rule will make it very difficult, if not impossible, for me to sell Home & Garden Party products. I have been a Designer with Home & Garden Party for 3 years and I have already been able to quit my "outside the home" job of 17 years to stay home with my children. This was accomplished out of hard work and determination---NO unfair or deceptive acts or practices were EVER implemented. My company as well as most companies do not tolerate such acts. The future of my family is dependent on the stability of the direct selling industry. One of the most confusing and burdensome sections of the proposed rule is the seven-day waiting period to enroll new designers. Home & Garden Party kits only cost between $99 and $149. People buy TV's, cars and other items that cost much more and they do not have to wait. This waiting period seems completely unneccessary, because Home & Garden Party has a 100% buyback policy! Under this waiting period requirement, I will need to keep such detailed records when I first speak to someone and send it in , etc. Doesn't this world have enough paperwork? If it was a necessary situation I would be fine with it, but under this circumstance it make no sense. The proposed rule also calls for the release of ANY information regarding lawsuits involving misrepresentation, or unfair or deceptive practices. It does not matter if the company was found innocent. Today, people sue others at the drop of a hat! It does not make sense to me to tell these suits unless Home & Garden Party is found guilty. If I do, then Home & Garden Party looks bad to others, even if Home & Garden Party has done nothing wrong! Ridiculous. I am also completely apposed to the rule that requires the disclosure of a minimum of 10 prior purchasers nearest to the prospective purchaser. I am glad to provide references, I could provide MANY more than 10, but who wants their private information given to total strangers in this day and age? Identity theft is bad enough, should we add to this? I completely appreciate all that the FTC does. I am sure it is no easy task, but this rule will cause such confusion and problems in this industry that it would be a sin to let it be passed. I feel there are other alternatives to this rule that would be more practical. Thanks you so much for your time and consideration of my concerns. Respectfully, Kimberly Jenkins