ll the country why it allows massive fraud on one hand, yet will modify complaints, declarations and use secret courts as tactics to selectively prosecute much more reputable businesses?

If the Federal Trade Commission cannot answer this question, then the franchising and business op division, no matter what verdict is reached on the newest revisions of definitions of these business m

Many MLM sales people mean well but they inadvertently commit fraud and violate rules and laws in their presentations. This is unfortunate and is an issue too big for the Federal Trade Commission to handle, like SPAM or Identity Theft; the FTC is impotent. Many of these MLM sales people have adopted the term; “Private Franchising” trying to distance themselves from the negative connotations of the multi-level marketing term. There is only one problem; Franchising, has an absolute definitions, which in no way resembles what these salespeople are out peddling.

If the MLM sales people do not understand the laws and the consumers do not understand the definitions of a franchise; after all they cannot find the states on a map of the US; it appears that there is nothing that can be done? Does this mean that the costs to educate the general public are too high and that money would be better spent hiring more attorneys at the Federal Trade Commission to attack and collect fees against small and medium sized companies which provide more jobs, tax base as a whole than the larger companies who pay little if any taxes or the small tiny MLM companies which provide one or less jobs?

Many see a whole lot of double standards here and question the true motivation of the Federal Trade Commission law enforcement efforts, which is quickly becoming the redheaded stepchild of the Department of Justice. We all need clarification. Many think the business community has that right to clarification and the Federal Trade Commission has the responsibility to tell the country why it allows massive fraud on one hand, yet will modify complaints, declarations and use secret courts as tactics to selectively prosecute much more reputable businesses?

If the Federal Trade Commission cannot answer this question, then the franchising and business op division, no matter what verdict is reached on the newest revisions of definitions of these business mo

of the multi-level marketing term. There is only one problem; Franchising, has an absolute definitions, which in no way resembles what these salespeople are out peddling.

If the MLM sales people do not understand the laws and the consumers do not understand the definitions of a franchise; after all they cannot find the states on a map of the US; it appears that there is nothing that can be done? Does this mean that the costs to educate the general public are too high and that money would be better spent hiring more attorneys at the Federal Trade Commission to attack and collect fees against small and medium sized companies which provide more jobs, tax base as a whole than the larger companies who pay little if any taxes or the small tiny MLM companies which provide one or less jobs?

Many see a whole lot of double standards here and question the true motivation of the Federal Trade Commission law enforcement efforts, which is quickly becoming the redheaded stepchild of the Department of Justice. We all need clarification. Many think the business community has that right to clarification and the Federal Trade Commission has the responsibility to tell the country why it allows massive fraud on one hand, yet will modify complaints, declarations and use secret courts as tactics to selectively prosecute much more reputable businesses?

If the Federal Trade Commission cannot answer this question, then the franchising and business op division, no matter what verdict is reached on the newest revisions of definitions of these business m

can be done? Does this mean that the costs to educate the general public are too high and that money would be better spent hiring more attorneys at the Federal Trade Commission to attack and collect fees against small and medium sized companies which provide more jobs, tax base as a whole than the larger companies who pay little if any taxes or the small tiny MLM companies which provide one or less jobs?

Many see a whole lot of double standards here and question the true motivation of the Federal Trade Commission law enforcement efforts, which is quickly becoming the redheaded stepchild of the Department of Justice. We all need clarification. Many think the business community has that right to clarification and the Federal Trade Commission has the responsibility to tell the country why it allows massive fraud on one hand, yet will modify complaints, declarations and use secret courts as tactics to selectively prosecute much more reputable businesses?

If the Federal Trade Commission cannot answer this question, then the franchising and business op division, no matter what verdict is reached on the newest revisions of definitions of these business m

e or less jobs?

Many see a whole lot of double standards here and question the true motivation of the Federal Trade Commission law enforcement efforts, which is quickly becoming the redheaded stepchild of the Department of Justice. We all need clarification. Many think the business community has that right to clarification and the Federal Trade Commission has the responsibility to tell the country why it allows massive fraud on one hand, yet will modify complaints, declarations and use secret courts as tactics to selectively prosecute much more reputable businesses?

If the Federal Trade Commission cannot answer this question, then the franchising and business op division, no matter what verdict is reached on the newest revisions of definitions of these business m

ll the country why it allows massive fraud on one hand, yet will modify complaints, declarations and use secret courts as tactics to selectively prosecute much more reputable businesses?

If the Federal Trade Commission cannot answer this question, then the franchising and business op division, no matter what verdict is reached on the newest revisions of definitions of these business models, should be shut down. This would help the taxpayers who should be alleviated from the cost of burden of their endeavors. Shutting it down would be smart as in the franchising industry there is no fraud to speak of and in the business opportunity division because it is not being enforced anyway. Simply admit, that business opportunity virus has reached epic proportions like SPAM and the problems cannot be controlled. Let another agency take over such as the CDC. Think about it.