| Comment Number: | 522418-10668 |
| Received: | 7/16/2006 8:23:26 PM |
| Organization: | |
| Commenter: | Andrew Prescher |
| State: | WI |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Details of the proposed Trade Regulation Rule on Business Opportunities have come to my attention, which given my four years as a IBO, give every indication that they will effectively result in killing 50 -75 % of all small businesses working with Quixtar. Several aspects of this regulation would cripple new businesses and destroy the dreams of tens of thousands of potential businessmen and women. Destroying their only hope to enjoy the benefits of Free Enterprise and depriving hundreds of thousands of citizens form finally having a chance in life to become better, restoring hope to their families and others, which in turn would make stronger communities and ultimate a better country. *********************************************************************** Quixtar, and World Wide group in particular, have always made every effort to be completely honest and have always stressed that there are no get rich quick schemes. That the only path to success is complete that of integrity and total dedication to helping others while still respecting their choices as IBOs. *************************************************************************** The seven day waiting period is totally unneeded as no one I have sponsored has every decided in less than a week while I ensure all their questions have been answered and they have as much information as I can give them before I allow them to decide. But to enforce a waiting period does nothing but discourage business and discourage people to act on their own. **************************************************************************** I am particularly appalled that this regulation would ask us to violate the privacy of others in providing references. This is unheard of anywhere else. If you were to try to buy a car but the salesperson refused to sell it to until they gave you the home numbers of other customers to call up and ask them personal questions, you would leave and go to someone else. Someone who had decided to ignore that rule, and most likely others. In short, this rule would promote the success of those very same unethical people you are seeking to protect the public from. **************************************************************************** In the same way Specific Earnings Disclosures are a heinous invasion of privacy. And as for my personal income how does one represent that my current income will not be my future income. How is it made clear to other people by a bank statement, that I have benefited enormously in non-financial ways through building this business, and that their results will be based solely on their effort and not what someone else has decided to do or not do. **************************************************************************** Finally providing a litigation list is stupid and I know of no Doctor, Lawyer, Politician, or Automotive manufacturer that provides this document. Beyond that it only provides information about other businesses not mine. And it only serves to glorify spurious litigious activity in an already overburdened Judicial system.