| Comment Number: | 522418-04601 |
| Received: | 6/27/2006 3:20:14 PM |
| Organization: | Quixtar |
| Commenter: | Barbara Colburn |
| State: | MD |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
I have been a Quixtar Independent Business Owner for 2 years. When the business opportunity was presented to me, I was asked to listen, told that I could not make any decision at that time, that no one would be taking money at that time, and that I had all the time I required to make the decision, and access to any number of people that could answer any questions that I might have. Fortunately, my husband and I made the decision to move forward in the Quixtar program. We started mostly as a shoppers on the Quixtar site and have only recently begun to grow our business through more consistent action. We intend to use the income from this to be able to retire in style, as our Social Security benefits will not provide us with much When approaching prospective IBO's, I always speak about the potential income based on their personal level of work. As with anything in life, this does require work in order to succeed. In reading some of the regulations in this proposed ruling, I find myself somewhat frustrated. I understand that this proposal is meant to weed out fraudulent organizations. However, some of the language is restrictive to my ability to conduct business. Additionally, it assumes that the adult population in American is unable make decisions for themselves when it comes to this particular type of venture. Nowhere else that I am aware is the ability to purchase/open a business so restrictive. 1) The 7-day wait period: This smacks of restraint of trade. If I wished to start a traditional business, I would not be asked to wait 7 days to hang-my-shingle, so to speak. Additionally, Quixtar offers a return of fees if the new registraint is not happy. Even products purchased carry a 180 day guarantee. Where is the risk to new IBO's? 2) References: Most IBO's are actively registering people and requiring me to provide my prospect with the names of other IBO's creates an unecessary risk to my business in that the prospect I have begun working with could be registered by someone else. Prospects are given an opportunity to meet at least 10, if not more, active IBO's at weekly seminars held across the country. I also have the ability to have them speak with people who have achieved high levels of income at any time. 3) Lists of Lawsuits: Is any other type of franchise asked to do so? Is Wendy's now required to provide a list of lawsuits to prospective franchisees that includes the unfounded finger-in-the-chili suit? Moreover, the broad use of the term SELLER opens the requirement for disclosure by all participants on any level within the corporate entity and/or franchise structure. 4) Specific Income Disclosures: I fail to see the need for this as we already disclose in our printed material the average monthly income for Active IBO's. 5) Financial Substatiation: I do not disclose to anyone the exact amount of my income from my Quixtar business. I do discuss what I have been able to do with my income and how I will use future income. I do not feel it appropriate that I share my financial information with what could amount to complete strangers, and I would not ask them to disclose their information to me. My husband and I are fully aware that the integrity of the Quixtar program has been called into question at times. However, if you look into individual circumstances, you find that either the parties did not pay attention, did not ask questions, or have their own agendas. We stand firmly behind any efforts by the FTC to expose and eliminate fraud in business. But we do take issue with the language in this document that would impede our ability to do business and require unnecessary documentation. We feel that we already provide a wide range of information that allows even the most unasstute prospect to make a truly informed decision. Additional legislation requiring even more paperwork for someone to wade through simply muddies the water and adds confusion, not clarification.