|Received:||7/17/2006 12:17:18 PM|
|Organization:||Quixtar IBO (B C & Associates)|
|Subject:||Business Opportunity Rule|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 437|
Comments:My wife and I are Independent Business Owners (IBO’s) with Quixtar; we have noticed an increasing interest in this opportunity recently. We have benefited greatly from the ongoing personal development, including seminars and conferences, and success oriented books. The Quixtar audio CD’s have raised my confidence level, while maintaining a balance. The audio messages all include the disclaimer that there is no guarantee of success. We know this is no get-rich-overnight scheme, and we were given enough proper information when we made our decision to register. We give our prospects exactly the same information. The Quixtar business is the best plan I’ve seen to help individuals and families help themselves by creating an ongoing passive income; and the exclusive products are second to none in quality. There are other legitimate direct marketing business plans which would also be affected by this proposed rule. That said, I know there are also illegitimate schemes in the marketplace which operate by deception. There may be a need for industry-wide disclosure rules, but I am greatly concerned that the present proposed rule would be too burdensome for the IBO’s building legitimate direct marketing businesses. With the Quixtar business plan, people through effort can in time reach financial freedom. We’ve found that for some this is a radical shift from the employee mindset; there is inertia to overcome and a momentum to build. My concern with the seven day waiting period is that it would only cause prospects to “get cold feet”, and I don’t see what would be gained. I suggest either dropping the seven day waiting period. Or, at the least, drop that requirement for Quixtar and other legitimate direct marketers which offer a full refund if the prospect is not satisfied. My concern with giving prospects a list of 10 (!) references is twofold. First, the risk that an IBO who went to the time and effort to contact a prospect, schedule a meeting, and complete a presentation could see the prospect sign up with another IBO, who didn’t take the time and do the work. Second, this would unfairly penalize IBO’s building their business in small towns, who would find it difficult if not impossible to find 10 IBO references within a reasonable distance of the prospect. I would also like to see any disclosures made during the business opportunity presentation kept as short and simple as possible, such as the example “average monthly gross income for ‘active’ IBO’s”. I’m most concerned with the proposal to require giving a list of all lawsuits and other legal claims against Quixtar and its IBO’s, even including false accusations. This would only increase the false accusations against Quixtar and other legitimate direct marketers, and would have no effect against the dishonest companies which would ignore the rule. This would be a difficult burden for the honest IBO to overcome. To summarize, while I think there needs to be some rule in place to shut down deception by bogus operators, this proposed rule is excessively burdensome to legitimate Independent Business Owners. The rule needs to be re-worked, or greatly simplified and precisely targeted to the illegitimate schemes. Thank you for your time in considering my comments.