| Comment Number: | 522418-03323 |
| Received: | 6/19/2006 10:15:34 AM |
| Organization: | Lustre Craft |
| Commenter: | Anne Wright |
| State: | GA |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Federal Trade Commission Office of the Secretary, Room H-135 (Annex W) RE: Business Opportunity Rule, R511993 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20580 RE: Opposition to Business Opportunity Rule, R511993 Dear Sir or Madam: I am writing in response to the proposed New Business Opportunity Rule R511993, if not modified, will be a significant impediment and burden to the direct marketing industry. I believe that in its present form, it could prevent me from continuing as a Distributor for Lustre Craft. This new rule, although well-intended, represents a significant burden to the free market trade. I understand that part of the FTC's responsibilities is to protect the public from "unfair and deceptive acts or practices," bust some of the sections in the proposed rule will make it impossible for me to earn a living selling cookware for Lustre Craft. One of the most confusing and burdensome sections of the proposed rule is the seven day waiting period to enroll new Distributors. If anyone wishes to become a Lustre Craft Distributor they simply fill out an application which is free to do. There is no additional kit or fee required. People buy TVs, cars, and other items that cost much more than that and they do not have to wait seven days. This waiting period gives the impression that there might be something wrong with the plan. Under this waiting period requirement, I will need to keep very detailed records when I first even speak to someone about Lustre Craft and then I will have to send in my reports to the Lustre Craft headquarters. 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, anyone or any company can be sued for almost anything. It does not make sense to me that I would have to disclose these lawsuits unless Lustre Craft is found guilty. Otherwise, I am put at an unfair advantage even though Lustre Craft has done NOTHING wrong. Finally, the proposed rule requires the disclosure of a minimum of 10 prior purchasers nearest to the prospective purchaser. I am glad to provide references, but in this day of identity theft, I am very uncomfortable giving out the personal information of individuals (without their approval) to strangers. Also, giving away this information could damage the business relationship of the references who may be involved in other companies or businesses including those of competitors. In order to get the list of the 10 prior purchasers, I will need to send the address of the prospective purchaser to Lustre Craft headquarters and then wait for the list. I also think the following sentence required by the proposed rule will prevent many people from wanting to sign up as a salesperson: "If you buy a business opportunity from the seller, your contact information can be disclosed in the future to other buyers." People are very concerned about their privacy and identity theft. They will be reluctant to share their personal information with individuals they may have never met. I have been a Lustre Craft Distributor for more than 3 years. Originally, I became a distributor for Lustre Craft products because I like them and wanted to earn some additional money. Now my family depends on this extra income to supplement our budget. I appreciate the work of the FTC to protect consumers, but I believe this proposed new rule has many unintended consequences and that there are less burdensome alternatives available in achieving its goals. Thank you for your time in considering my comments. Sincerely, Anne T. Wright,