| Comment Number: | 522418-02552 |
| Received: | 6/16/2006 9:16:45 AM |
| Organization: | XanGo, LLC Independent Distributor |
| Commenter: | Brian Bowers |
| State: | OH |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Allow me to relate my story, in order to set the stage for comments on the proposed rule. I have been building my XanGo business for 1.5 years, in partnership with my wife. This is not our first foray into network marketing. I began looking for a business in the fall of 2004. After looking into many opportunities, I decided to look into network marketing again. I e-mailed an ad I was exposed to. A representative contacted me and conveyed all the necessary information. This was all in a professional and friendly environment. After several weeks of weighing XanGo and a couple others, my wife and I decided to become distributors. The training we have received has been incredible. If in a few years I leave XanGo, the personal training the company and distributor force have provided will be worth whatever price paid. The skills I’ve learned in the past 18 months have been the most universally useful I’ve ever seen. I have been employed by multi-national firms, unwilling to put the time, effort and care into building up the inner person, while building up the business. I have utilized my training in my main occupation, which is sales manager for a construction company. Parts of the training have become the basis for changes in how our construction company relates to our customers, suppliers and craftsmen. I owe a lot to XanGo. I understand the FTC’s role in protecting today’s consumer. However, even the best of intentions can result in negative outcomes. In my personal opinion the FTC is perilously on the edge of just this type of situation. Direct selling and network marketing comprise a sizeable portion of the U.S. economy. We can all argue percentages, but have to agree on the fact we’re not talking about a minor smidgeon. Placing regulations and legislation in motion that will impede legitimate commerce will only damage the U.S. economy. In many situations today, honest citizens are governed and regulated in excess, with the intention in mind to restrict the criminal. The key flaw in the equation is the criminal, by definition, does not play by the rules. Place as many in motion as you would like and they will find any way to penetrate the loopholes and commit their crime. Telling legitimate network marketing companies they have to provide a 7 day waiting period will do nothing but encumber progress. Today, we have a fighting chance, to prove to potential distributors our company is legitimate and ethical. By adding governmental regulations like this, a heightened level of suspicion will occur. On another point in the proposed rule, providing litigation data, with no observable reference benchmark nor clarification of the data is purely misleading. Can I find this same data on Microsoft? Is there any “national standard” information to help me evaluate Microsoft? Compare it to the industry or nation? Providing law suit information on my construction company would yield three cases. Can you tell me, from that fact alone, what the information tells you about my company over the past 10 years? There is a serious flaw in the logic of this rule. As far as providing references, let’s all please remember that shills have a part of the con game for hundreds (if not thousands) of years. An unethical opportunity business will easily circumvent this part of the rule and use it well to their advantage and the extreme disadvantage of the consumer. Remember, as soon as any portion of the government puts criteria on a process that must be followed, the average consumer is going to automatically assume it’s been “approved”. They will interpret the word “approved” as having been “investigated” or “authenticated”. This will backfire. Finally, the portion of your rule discussing distribution of contact information of the 10 nearest distributors has to seriously infringe on privacy issues. The rule will force people’s contact information and private matters to be divulged to anyone asking. You are creating a free method for unscrupulous direct sales people to get ten free leads from each new person they contact. You will also cause ten distributors to now be recruited by another company. Also, this rule will encumber the individual companies, with the responsibility of providing this data for hundreds of thousands of people trying to earn a living. This portion of the rule will remove spontaneity and energy from the business. You’ll kill business momentum. What I’m sure you are about to find out is how many people you are touching and how quickly we can respond. Listen carefully to the feedback you’ll receive. This is the voice of the micro-businesses in America defending itself.