| Comment Number: | 522418-06852 |
| Received: | 7/7/2006 6:06:38 PM |
| Organization: | Xango |
| Commenter: | Judy Katz |
| State: | VT |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
RE Business Opportunity Rule, R511993 – Comments against this rule for businesses w/an investment of under $500 Hello, Over the years I have been exposed to various business opportunities. They have given me the opportunity to work from home and get started simply and with very little investment as opposed to brick and mortar or storefront businesses or franchises. For me, businesses such as Xango and others have represented a viable opportunity to become financially free. Although I am not currently marketing Xango I want to be heard because of my prior experiences. In my experience there have always been complainers, and most usually I've found them to be people who wanted something for nothing, and were unwilling to work to get what they wanted. When success didn't come overnight, they quit trying, quit the business, and started complaining. To negatively impact the income and prosperity of those who are currently successfully involved in businesses that would be affected by the proposed rule because of the complaints of people who weren’t successful is like throwing the baby out with the bath water. Did they work hard? Why were they not successful? Most small brick and mortar businesses fail, but I don’t see a push to make them economically unviable. For me, this red tape could mean the difference in getting started or not. The requirements of this rule will have a chilling effect. They will make it much more difficult to get started, and much more complicated to satisfy compliance ongoing with such a mountain of paperwork and requirements. In a home business, I wear all the hats. But there’s only one hat that makes any money. Adding more hats just reduces profitability and for me will make my “simple home business” an oxymoron and a deterrent to operating such a business. I currently use and rely upon many, many extraordinary products that are sold via network marketing companies that would become subject to the requirements of this rule. These products keep me healthy and my home a clean, safe chemical-free place to live. I would be outraged if the companies went out of business due to decreased sales resulting from this rule. With so much of our manufacturing done overseas now, why would we not encourage and support companies that manufacture and prosper in the U.S. and provide a real, true service to the economy and our country. I feel that the good intentions behind this proposed rule are misplaced, and I urge you to continue the exemption for business opportunities requiring only a small investment. The small investment exemption represents a balancing of all the competing interests. This will give me hope for achievable financial prosperity, and support the availability of these extraordinary products which I use daily. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Judy Katz