|Received:||6/8/2006 1:08:43 AM|
|State:||Not in the US|
|Subject:||Business Opportunity Rule|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 437|
Comments:This is a second comment page posted on the Business Opportunity Rule R511993. The last page posted had a tracking number of 522418-01385 was assigned on: 6/8/2006 12:16:30 AM. Continuation; 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. People today are understandably reluctant to share their personal information with individuals they may never have met. The proposed rule also requires the disclosure of a minimum of 10 prior purchasers nearest to the prospective purchaser. There are many problems with this proposed requirement. Not only is it a privacy issue, but providing ten references also could damage the businesses of numerous distributors that worked honestly to develop these distributors. Lower ranking distributors often are involved in more than one direct selling company. Providing 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 opportunity. The ten reference requirement also is an administrative burden. In order to obtain the list of 10 prior purchasers, the prospective distributor's address would need to be filed with the company, 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 seven calendar days before any potential recruit can sign an application. 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. Today, almost all business lawsuits contain claims of misrepresentation or unfair competition. It does not make sense to release this information, unless the company was found guilty or liable. Again this Federal Trade Ruling should be equal across the board for all companies that sell products to consumers. The Giants like Wal-Mart; tell a prospective purchaser that he needs to wait for 7 days, and then his information will be sent out to 10 other buyers that want to purchase the same product. Don’t just share this ruling with a few; make sure all companies and their administrators share in this nightmare. Maybe it would save me buying a lot of things in the stores I walk through, if first I had the names of 10 others that purchased it first. Guess consumer’s report would then go out of business. Let’s see every company release their dirty laundry of law suits, for we know that ALL PEOPLE are fare when trying to sue a company. I’m sure if every company had to release that information to a potent ional buyer, then all stocks on Wall Street would come crumpling down. Again this Ruling makes NO sense at all!!!! I love trying new products, mainly from MLM companies, because you find the most new and innovated stuff to use and try. Yet if this ruling goes into effect, I will not try another product through this avenue. Which is one large street, please don't make this awful roadblock that will slow down the traffic of our much needed economy.