|Received:||6/30/2006 9:11:08 PM|
|Subject:||Business Opportunity Rule|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 437|
Comments:I applaud the FTC for working to protect the dreams of those who look into multi-level marketing as a means of primary or supplemental income. Those who consider multi-level are typically individuals who are willing to step out of a comfort zone to try something new to benefit their families, so the desire of the FTC to help people avoid entering into a business that boasts fraudulent claims is appreciated. I am a participant in a multi-level marketing organization that I believe is of the highest caliber, Quixtar. However, after reviewing the proposed requirements of the potential new law, I am troubled. My concern is that potential new business associates would 1) be discouraged by or possibly misinterpret the paperwork received under the new requirements, 2) be enticed into other lines of sponsorship because of the 10 references rule, and 3) make a decision about taking advantage of the opportunity based on needlessly publicized litigation concerns from years gone by; litigation that may have involved an individual and is no way associated with the true organization. I fully support being truthful in communicating business successes and making potential partners aware of what can keep them from success. I believe in the need to be truthful about the amount of income a multi-level sales organization can provide. But I also believe that the proposed FTC law would hinder those who already conduct business with high moral and ethical standards. Those who don't share the high standards will conduct their businesses as they desire despite the law, so only the law-abiding would suffer. Please consider the honest multi-level worker when finalizing the law. Please also consider only taking action against those who run their organizations in a fraudulent manner rather than blanket laws that cause the honest worker to suffer. Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback to this proposal.