| Comment Number: | 522418-12758 |
| Received: | 7/17/2006 11:56:28 PM |
| Organization: | XanGo |
| Commenter: | Charles Willett |
| State: | IL |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
CHARLES A. WILLETT 07/17/06 Dear Federal Trade Commission, I would first of all like to start off by saying that as a consumer, the fact that the F.T.C. exists to protect us is irreplaceable. There are so many dishonest people trying to take advantage of the innocent, it’s hard to know where you can put your trust. Your work to bring credibility and integrity to the forefront of business is invaluable, and for that I thank you. My purpose in writing to you today is due to the fact that I’ve been informed of a new rule (R511993) being proposed by the F.T.C. and the potential effect it could have on my business. So with that said, let me give you a background on myself. I have been a part of the XanGo Corporation for almost a year and a half now. I am an independent distributor of mangosteen juice, XanGo’s main and only product. The company has shown me only excellence in their character, the quality of their product, and, most importantly, the keeping of their promise. By this I mean the claims they make regarding the juice. I’ve experienced nothing that would cause me to think otherwise. In fact, the juice has had a wonderful effect on me, ridding me of the cold sores that I had endured for about ten years, and causing me to not need to drink coffee just to stay awake anymore. But that’s for another time. Let me get to the issue at hand. Under this new rule, there are some things that would drastically change my distributorship with XanGo. This is what I wish to address today. 1) Seven-day waiting period. On the purchaser’s part, I would have to say there would be some suspicion with waiting this amount of time to get involved in the business. In fact, the effect that this would have could be devastating when thinking about travel and sales. For example, if I was on vacation and happened to meet someone who was interested in the product, to ask them to wait seven days before purchasing or signing up would almost guarantee the deal dying. And this could have serious repercussions, considering the people who might’ve gotten involved under the person I met and introduced the business to while on vacation. 2) References. The fact alone that my name, address and phone would be given to just about anyone who requests it is alarming to me. What about the “do-not-call” list? This would be something that would be detrimental to the sale or distributorship of any potential client. Honest and upstanding business individuals would try to abide by this rule, while I fear that the people who this rule is targeting would still get away with their skullduggery. 3) Cancellations and Refunds. With there not being a high level of refunds in XanGo’s business, the opposite is true of cancellations, due to the fact that some people come into the business with specific, short-term goals in mind. Once these goals have been achieved, they cancel their distributorship and move on. This can be very misleading information when disclosing it to a new purchaser and can cause them to be skeptical. I personally have no intention of ever canceling, but my goals may be different than those who have done so. In closing, I will say that the proposition of Rule R511993 has good intentions, but falls short when it comes to rewarding those who do business with integrity, character, and honesty. The corrupt will find ways to be dishonest with false information and deceit, while the upright will find it harder to be excellent and accurate in all their business dealings. I hope that this letter will help you in your re-working of the rule. I would like to say “thank you” for the opportunity to voice my opinion on this matter. I know that you will make the best decision concerning this issue. Keep up the good work. Respectfully yours, Charles A. Willett