Dunkin' Responds with No Comment on How DDIFO Conducts Its Affairs

“Never argue with a pig in the mud. You'll only get dirty, frustrated and eventually you'll come to find you are at a decided disadvantage. Moreover, the pig actually enjoys himself.”

FYI: Often, franchisors approximate big, fat pigs, don't they?

If I were to invest in any franchise I would:

- Work for a franchisee for a while to see if I loved the business
- Make sure I was comfortable with the franchisor's management team (and my own)
- Read and understand every word of the franchise agreements
- Hire competent and experienced professionals to advise me (CPA, Franchise Atty., etc.)
- Read the UFOC and/or FDD, as the case may be
- I would be sure to run some sensitivity analysis to see if I could sustain higher expenses than anticipated and/or a less robust sales than anticipated.
- Speak to at least 10 existing and 5 ex-franchisees about the pros and cons of being a franchisee.
- I would be sure to gage the level of franchisee satisfaction
- Speak to the Independent Franchisee Organization(s)
- Understand the level of litigation between the franchisor and its franchisees
- Have a meticulously detailed business plan with an exit strategy just in case things did not go according to my plan

Conclusion: Prospective franchisees have a choice to sign or not to sign a franchise agreement. Only a fool does not do exhaustive due diligence and then and only then execute franchise documents that he or she is ready to live by. If you don't like the deal, don't get out your pen and checkbook! Bitching (or litigating) about what you signed after the fact is most often fruitless if not counterproductive.

Who pays to support the DDIFO? Is it 100% f'ee supported or does the f'or contribute, like in some other franchised systems? If the former, then it speaks volumes that membership "writes the checks". They must find value in keeping it around (and to take the trouble to remodel their board of directors).

Dear Mr. Caldeira:

Tell us a little more about your Advisory Council, won't you? Who pays for your meetings? Who pays for the expenses including the meals and travel for your franchisees to attend? Who controls the agenda's and free flow of the discussions? How much democratic voting goes on at your advisory council meetings? Tell us about how much you value dissenting opinions and what happens to "troublemakers"? Are your franchisees' profit margins as healthy as they once were? Given what I have been reading in the press, it looks to me that you are being more than a little disingenuous when you say, "At Dunkin’ Brands, we share a common goal with our franchisees–our most important constituency–to strengthen our brands and increase their sales and profitability". My goal is to exercise daily and eat right, but I admit I come up short more often than not! What is your track record on franchisee profitability of late?

Sorry, Mr. Caldeira, it looks to me that if your franchisees were completely happy with what your company was up to, and if they were totally satisfied with the "representation" they were getting in your advisory council, then the DDIFO would be deemed irrelevant by its members and go out of existance. Isn't it true that DDIFO membership is at an all time high? I would love to hear your well-crafted responses to these questions. Please respond truthfully and just try to spin your responses to your advantage for all the world to see. I can hardly wait!

Mr. Caldeira writes-- 

"We recognize and respect that individuals and organizations, such as the DDIFO, that have no official ties to the Dunkin’ Brands organization or our elected franchisee advisory councils, have their own agendas, to which they are certainly  entitled. However, they do not seem to take into consideration the strength and well-being of the entire Dunkin’ Donuts organization". 

No, of course they don't.  The DDIFO takes into consideration what is best for their constituents, Dunkin Donuts franchisees.  There will always be issues that favor the Franchisor at the expense of the Franchisee, (such as selling Dunkin Donuts coffee at other unrelated retail outlets), and vice versa.

He then contends--- 

"At Dunkin’ Brands, we share a common goal with our franchisees–our most important constituency–to strengthen our brands and increase their sales and profitability"

The above statement ignores the fact that strengthening the brand and increasing franchisee sales and profitability don't  always go hand in hand. Marketing Dunkin Donuts brand coffee at the local supermarket might help strengthen the brand, (although I doubt the connection between Dunkin Donuts and coffee needs to be reemphasized), but it also serves to decrease franchisee sales and profitability.

He concludes with-- 

"We will continue to work closely and collaborate with our franchisees, as we have done so for the past 58 years, because we truly recognize how critical they are to our overall business success".

He seemingly omitted--

--as long as they don't choose to organize on their own or attempt to collaborate in a manner which we can't control or don't approve....

Stephen Caldeira was quoted as saying: "we do not feel it would be appropriate to comment on how the DDIFO chooses to manage its affairs."

He was also quoted as saying: "they do not seem to take into consideration the strength and well-being of the entire Dunkin’ Donuts organization."

So which is it? You say you don't think its appropriate to comment then you go one to comment on what you want to comment on.

The Brand Advisory Council is controlled by the brand, the DDIFO is independent.

Its obvious you would rather manage your franchisees in a controlled forum rather than deal with them as an independent association.

Democracy is a bitch, isn't it?