| Comment Number: | 522418-03156 |
| Received: | 6/17/2006 6:44:18 PM |
| Organization: | Mooshagian Enterprises |
| Commenter: | Janet Mooshagian |
| State: | CA |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Re: Business Opportunity Rule, R511993 I am writing to express strong opposition to the proposed Business Opportunity Rule R511993. This rule would make it very difficult for me to operate my business as a Shaklee Independent Distributor. A confusing and burdensome section is the seven-day waiting period to enroll new distributors. Most of the people who sign an application are consumers of the products. If later they decide to build a business, no additional fee or kit is required. The Member Kit costs only $19.95. This is far less less than most consumer purchases, from TVs to all manner of household appliances, none of which require a waiting period. This waiting period is unnecessary as our company has a 90% buyback policy for -products, including the Member Kit purchased within the last two years. The proposed rule requires the disclosue of a minimum of 10 prior purchasers nearest to the prospective purchaser. In this day of identity theft, I am very uncomfortable giving out the personal infromation of other Shaklee distributors, without their knowledge or consent. Providing 10 references also could damage the businesses of Shaklee distributors. The 10 reference requirement is an administrative burden. I will need to provide Shaklee with prospective distributor's address, and wait to receive the list of the 10 nearest 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 days before anyone can sign an application. If they enter direct selling to earn extra income for a specific goal, the wait which the proposed rule creates makes for an undue hardship. The proposed rule calls for the release of any information regarding lawsuits that allege misrepresentation, or unfair practices over a 10-year period. It does not matter if the company was found innocent or not liable. This does not make sense to me that I would have to disclose these lawsuits. Fifty-year old companies such as Shaklee would be at a disadvantage compared to start-up companies, which may not yet have experienced litigation but are far more likely to have legal issues surrouonding their opportunities. My husband and I have been involved in our Shaklee business for over 35 years. Originally, I became a Shaklee Distributor because I loved the Company's nutritional/personal care/ household products. I was a school teacher but I wanted to stay at home with my children and be able to earn some additional income working from my home. Now we depend upon this extra income for our livelihood. I truly believe this is a completely unfair proposed ruling. Thank you for considering my comments. Sincerely, Janet and Ray Mooshagian