AAFD Standards Committee Put in Awkward Position
It was a joyous occassion with a happy message of franchising in a fair way, with one exception. AAFD sent a strong metaphor—a song and dance on the podium numerous times with Cuppy's leaders performing and speaking alongside AAFD leaders.
AAFD Awards Banquet in Newport News, VA 2008
With its standards meeting scheduled for Tuesday and Wednesday, such action raises the question of whether the outcome of Cuppy's being a member in good standing has been pre-determined. Members of AAFD previously had said on Blue MauMau that everyone could present and discuss in a meeting open to the public whether Cuppy's has met AAFD's fair franchising standards over this past year.
Dale Nabors, CEO of Cuppy's Coffee began his speech, "Bob [Purvin] asked me to say this in two minutes or less..."
One naturally asks whether this might be an attempt by the chair to influence the standards committee members attending the banquet.
Perceptions matter. A perception of trying to rehabilitate an image was created from the very moment that Cuppy's president, Doug Hibbing began to sing on the stand. That perception was reinforced when its CEO began his speech.
Nabors admitted, "In my opinion, we [Cuppy's] weren't living up to AAFD standards. Cuppy's had a desire to. I'm here tonight to say that we are going to commit to living up to the AAFD fair franchising standards."
Sounding very similar to commitments made at the AAFD conference in Dallas last year where Cuppy's president Doug Hibbing and his boss's wife, Mrs. Morgan, said that they were honored and that they would change company practices to meet AAFD standards, now Hibbing's new boss, Mr. Nabors says, "Next year we hope our franchise review and our franchisees say we deserve to be here."
The problem for the standards committee on Tuesday and Wednesday is that they must deal with the consequences of the awards banquet.
The issue of whether Cuppy's violated the association's standards has been resolved by the voice of its new CEO. Yes.
The issue for the standards committee is whether the awards banquet mea culpa puts the issue to bed. For the standards committee to do nothing will undermine not only its credibility in this instance but also will lead to the perception (rightly or wrongly) that what matters is a company's relationship with Bob Purvin and not its adherence to AAFD standards.
The statements made tonight, coupled with the song and dance metaphor, place not only the standards committee but Robert Purvin in an awkward position. How they respond over the next two days of meetings may well influence the future of the organization itself.
After Dale Nabors' apology, AAFD's chairman Robert Purvin took the podium. He did not respond to Cuppy's admission, but simply said, "[Dale], I'd like you to present this next [fair franchising] award..."
An award was given out this evening by a presenter whose company by his own admission has not lived up to AAFD standards. Such a presentation undermines the value of the association's fair franchising awards.
--
Related Readings
- Roy Snowden Gets Four Years
- Java Jo'z Controversy Gaining Attention Via Blogs by Sean Kelly
- An Interview with Cuppy's Coffee President by Janet Sparks
- How Blogging Saved the World: A Tale of Java Jo'z and Cuppy's Coffee by Don Sniegowski
- Ramblings and a Lesson by Dale Nabors
- Some Words From AAFD On Cuppy's Coffee and Elite Manufacturing by Bob Purvin
- Franchisor Accreditation, AAFD
- The AAFD Awards Cuppy’s Coffee Franchise with Contract Accreditation. by Steven Dubin
- Official Statement from Cuppy's Coffee & More by Cuppy's Coffee
- Franchise topic:
I'm all for any effort that might increase quality franchising, but I don't understand how any organization(s) desiring public support (or desirous of promoting quality) could exercise mutual admiration 'before' resolving obviously important problems, whether those problems are AAFD or franchisor related.
My opinion is that he AAFD allowed an awful lot of PR damage to enter its camp. And that damage probably could have been avoided by pre-conference disclosure of actions (or at least announced 'planned' actions) to rectify a very bad situation.
And a public note to you, Bob – You’re a personable guy and I appreciate your invitations, but I think that this action, if there was any actionable strategic plan at all, was not in the best interests of anyone involved. Although many franchise old timers don't want to believe it, transparency via the internet is now a fact of life. With this said, I'm interested in seeing how this debacle plays out. And, if Webster makes a statement from the ‘boardroom’, I trust that you also, as head of the organization, will tell us what’s going on. Frankly, I think the future of the AAFD will turn on this issue.
By the way, using my own name and contact information, I began the franchising process with Cuppy’s just to get a ‘feel’ for the organization. After an initial conversation with a sales qualifier I was emailed a purchase order for shop equipment that apparently was meant for another prospect. Upon letting the firm know that I was not that prospect, all contact ceased.
Nick Bibby is a franchise consultant and principal of the Bibby Group.
Nick Bibby founded BibbyGroup.com, an organization dedicated to franchise and entrepreneurial excellence.
Nick writes: "I don't understand how any organization(s) desiring public support (or desirous of promoting quality) could exercise mutual admiration 'before' resolving obviously important problems, whether those problems are AAFD or franchisor related."
Neither do I.
To clarify, I made the statement in the open public standards meeting. If Mr. BMM doesn't report it on in due course, I will.
Michael Webster PhD LLB
Franchise News
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
So, why the hell should these franchisees have to go to Virginia to have this mediated or maybe Cuppy's should have footed their bill:
JD is entirely correct, there is no reason for the Cuppy's franchisees entitled to refunds to have travelled to Virginia - a lovely place from which I am posting.
There have been been numerous and important posts raised about Cuppy's. But most people have misunderstood the process.
The Standards Committtee which just finished meeting is not the body that will deal with the Cuppy's accreditation isssue.
The Board of Directors of the AAFD, of which I am now a member, will deal with the issue and make a public report. A number of public statements have been made and will be throughly reviewed for their factual basis.
However, Standard 1.8 allows the accredited company some measure of confidentiality for a review. Until that review is completed, which should be done for the July Board meeting, I will not be commenting on this very important issue.
But some of you may want to ask Mr. Blue MauMau for a full reporting about the comments I made in the Standard's meeting on this issue.
Michael Webster PhD LLB
Franchise News
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
AAFD Standards = Prize winning oxymoron. YEA! Give 'em a bloody plaque!--
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
Richard, I have always been amused by your comments - and especially how readily you will admit to being wrong.
Michael Webster PhD LLB
Franchise News
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
It's a puzzler... Why wouldn't victims, who fell for a scam given credibility by a "fair franchising award," spend money to watch the offenders buy rounds of drinks and play rounds of golf with their money? Why can't they take time off from work and dip into their bank accounts so they can see Bob Purvin and Doug Hibbing delight the crowd in a top hat and cane rendition of "Putting on the Ritz"?
Why should someone have to attend a convention to get their own money returned? Unlike many discussed here, this is not a complicated situation. These guys took refundable deposits and are refusing to return it. One can only assume that they've got money to contribute to the AAFD for a fresh supply of smoke and mirrors. They've got money to advertise for new franchise depositors. They've got money to pay someone to post on a couple dozen phony blogs every day. But they can't give people back their own money?
Robyn is working two jobs while going to school, and her husband Corey is too. Criston and her partner are working overtime, as are Lina & Lee Alcafaras and potentially many others.
Have any of you ever had your car stolen, or your house burglarized? Our house was broken into earlier this year while my family slept. It never occurred to me to attend the 16th Annual Home Invader's Association meeting in the hope of getting our stuff back.
Sean Kelly
seankelly[at]ideafarm.net
Franchise Pick
Franchisor Marketing
seankelly@ideafarm.net
IdeaFarm, Franchise Pick
Franchisor Marketing
Sean, the information presented to the Board of Directors suggested that these individuals had actually been approved by their bank and then got buyer's remorse.
If you or they have information to the contrary, please email it to me directly.
I will also follow up with these individuals.
Michael Webster PhD LLB
Franchise News
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
Michael Webster PhD LLB
Franchise News
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
Nobody is saying that this bunch is "good".
I got into a public debate with Cuppy's counsel on Tuesday, and even suggested that the audience go on BMM and look at the letter I got from Nixon Peabody, and also I mentioned the John Dozier intimidation tactics. Moreover, I took issue from the floor with Mr. Purvin on the issue of how long it was taking Cuppy's to issue refunds in cases where there was no argument as to the fact that refunds were owed.
As to the Board calling on some of the zees, Mr. Webster announced that he intended to do so. Previously on BMM he had urged any parties having evidence to submit it to him.
In his recent post, Mr. Webster noted that if his information as to the issuance of financing was in error, Mr. Kelly and/or the affected zees should contact Mr. Webster.
Mr. Webster's report will only be as good as the data submitted to him plus what he is able to garner through his own investigation. Therefore it would appear to be in the interest of parties having a stake in this matter to contact Mr. Webster if they have not already done so.
Mr. Webster is hardly sympathetic to this franchisor, but he is also charged with preparing a report based on facts. The more input, the better.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Paul Steinberg, Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
For those outside the US, "NAMBLA" stands for "North American Man-Boy Love Association" and it is an organization which supports pedophilia.
The AAFD did not steal anyone's money. The AAFD does not support pedophilia. The AAFD does not support violation of franchise law; indeed the AAFD attempts to demand more than the statutory requirements.
When I owned a Subway store, my partner used to give coffee to the homeless folks in the wee hours. One day a homeless guy decided he didn't like the coffee and threw it in Gerry's face, and that was the end of that.
Certainly no one is obligated to accept a helping hand. And the AAFD having Doug Hibbing at the annual dinner was just plain stupid. So fine, don't accept the AAFDs coffee. But there's no need to throw it in the offeror's face. Mr. Purvin may have misjudged the franchisor, but his efforts at getting these deposits returned springs from a genuine effort to get this money returned.
The alternative is to follow the advice of Mr. Solomon. He charges $1000 for his "Do Diligence FranWhack" in which after your check clears he tells you not to buy a franchise. If you have done so, he tells you to give him a 5-figure retainer and he'll sue. And unless you are nearing a Statute of Limitations deadline, why not first try a low-cost alternative?
Oh... and while you are on the subject of what non-parties are doing wrong, how about the responsibility of the purchasers? Unlike your offensive NAMBLA reference, these are not 8-year old boys. They are grown adults who gave their franchise fee to a construction company and neither they nor their attorneys found anything odd about that. They are grown adults whose legal counsel didn't demand that funds whcih should have been in an attorney escrow account were placed in the proper account. These are not children, they are adults. These are not burglary victims, they are people who voluntarily wrote checks and didn't exercise as much common sense as they should have.
I do not excuse the behavior of the franchisor. I remain dubious that this franchisor has a long-term future. Mr. Hibbing is actually a nice guy, but I don't trust him nor do I think much of his business acumen or ethics, and why Dale Nabors hasn't given him a severance check is beyond me.
I disagreed strongly with Mr. Purvin, as did Mr. Webster and others. But the AAFD was not responsible for what Robert Morgan and Doub Hibbing did. The AAFD did not have sex with children or burgle homes--it offered to try and help in a contract dispute, and one would think that Sean Kelly would be supportive of an attempt to get this money returned.
Internet scandal is hugely entertaining--and at times useful in bringing public pressure to bear--but ultimately those who are serious about this may wish to attempt a resolution. If not, skip that step and call Mr. Solomon and write him a big check. Your decision.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Paul Steinberg, Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
What Morgan did was wrong: he made risky bets in a time of a credit crunch. It was a bad business decision. It hurt a lot of people.
I believe that Bob Purvin accepts this, and I also believe that Cuppy's in house counsel believes this.
However, as Richard is so fond of stating, there is no nanny state nor should there be one. For whatever reason, some propsective franchisees gave money to a construction company that for all they knew could have been insolvent.
It does not appear that anyone of them consulted a franchisee attorney before committing themselves to a purchase costing them over 150k.
That was a bad decision.
However, the AAFD has been instrumental in making some people's bad decisions turn out better.
The AAFD's accreditation award made Cuppy's produce refunds faster with less expense than Richard, Paul or I could have done through litigation. (This is why Richard is so harsh - he is losing a possible fee.)
Have we been perfect? No.
Could we have been better in preventing this situation? I believe that we could have, said so at the Standards Meeting, and am working to ensure that the next accredited contract review works better.
Will we get it perfect next time around? No. But we can make it more likely that real collaborative franchising will work.
Personally, I am appreciative of the work that Sean Kelly has done to keep this issue alive and in the fore front. Public pressure on a franchisor does work for reputable franchise systems.
Not everyone is going to be satisified - bad decisions were made all around. But only the AAFD's accredited contract status made many of the outcomes of these bad decisions better, quicker and with less expense than litigation.
As I have said on other posts, if anyone has information that suggests that either there are more than 3 Cuppy's franchisees with unresolved problems or that the settlement agreement violated the AAFD's Standard on "Gag" clauses, they should email me.
The AAFD's review of the Cuppy's accreditation status should be done in a preliminary fashion by July, with the final review ready for the Standards meeting in September.
Michael Webster PhD LLB
Franchise News
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
for that ringing endorsement.
Just to be clear - you weren't suggesting that my fee structure is unreasonable, were you?
If yours is lower, well - - you know what you're worth.--
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
No, the fee is not unreasonable and that is the point. Litigation is expensive and emotionally draining. It is also a lot less of a slam-dunk than the client usually believes.
Under the circumstances, if there is an organization which has a chance of obtaining a non-judicial resolution, that would seem to be worth a shot.
Whining may be cathartic, but it won't put money in your pocket and if all these folks are going to do is whine and snap at anyone who offers a productive option, they will end up with lots of fellow whiners on BMM. Misery loves company.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Paul Steinberg, Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
You are right on the money. I love your post. Why would anyone want to go to a meeting when they know Cuppy's is not good. If they were good, it would be a priorty that the people they scammed get their money back.
It would be like me going to a meeting with people I know scammed me. I never want to see them again. I would be afraid my reaction would not be civil.
They didn't attend because they understood that going there would produce nothing. If refunds were available, they would have been provided without attendance at the AAFD annual picnic. Free lawyers are worth what you pay 'em. Aint nothing free!
A suggestion that the plane ticket would have put $ 30,000 in anyone's pocket is sheer nonsense.It's kinda like Hillarious Clintstone's gas tax break bullshit. Until you said that, I thought you were really bright.--
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
Let's see, there was a 'gag' order put in place on people that signed the agreement. Did Cuppy's waive that? Also, these people are out $30k+, so spending more money to travel to some organizations meeting that is clearly on the side of Cuppy's would've really done nothing. The AAFD is a joke, plain and simple.
If any one of the individuals trashing the AAFD can even recite the processes to gain a Fair Franchising Seal or Accredited Contract, I would certainly like to know. Me too. Maybe if it were set to music... like the hokey pokey...
Where is... the good that the AAFD has done? Where is the reporting of the franchisees that are happy with their agreement and thier franchisor because of the AAFD's effort in setting those standards that now are beneficial to all? Where is the fairness in franchising? Good questions. Really good questions. Where are all the happy Cuppy's Coffee franchise owners?
Just to set the record straight, if not for the AAFD those Cuppy's franchisees would never have had the right to a refund! Thanks for setting the record straight.... Got to go (backing slowly toward the door) I'm wanted back on Earth now...
seankelly@ideafarm.net
IdeaFarm, Franchise Pick
Franchisor Marketing
Sean Kelly writes:
The AAFD's involvement in my franchise system, Meineke, has been instrumental in fostering an environment between franchisor and franchisee that has resulted in over 75% of our franchisees providing a favorable response when asked recently about their relationship with the franchisor. The AAFD's assistance has allowed our independent dealer's association to grow and offer many benefits to our membership that we otherwise could not have which has strengthened our position and voice. The involvement of individuals from both the franchisee and franchisor side of the equation in the AAFD has exposed both sides to the concept of fair franchising and provided us with benchmarks to guage our progress towards a goal of promoting our system to the benefit of all concerned.
So please count Meineke as one example of where the AAFD has facilitated improvements in a franchise system that have benefited the franchisor and franchisees alike.
There is a discernible difference between what people say they are about and the realities of it all.
In the instance of the AAFD, that difference is demonstrated by the facts that: (1) Despite their claim to be advocates for "fair" franchising,they have changed nothing and accomplished nothing other than confering awards on the bozos who pretend that they have merit. They don't; and (2) If someone pays some kind of formalistic lip service to their so called agenda (like Cuppys), they lack the ability to see that it is just bullshit and insincerity - and they then confer status and awards upon any miscreant who manipulates them.
It is ridiculous to get worked up/upset about the AAFD, because it is just pretense and not substance. It is a chatters' club and nothing more. Appropriately it is in California, near Disneyland.--
Get a life! These are all just phony theoreticians. They accomplish nothing and signify nothing. The AAFD is what you get for chump change.
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
Fact: The AAFD is a national non-profit trade association dedicated to defining and promoting Total Quality Franchising practices.
Would you consider what Cuppy's has done lately to be in compliance with these practices? If not, why would you honor that franchise with some time at the podium during one of the AAFD marquee events of the year?
Don't try to spin the difference between the Franchise Seal of Approval and the Accredited Contract status -- i personally don't know what the difference is and i really don't care. If you continue to associate yourself with slime after recognizing the slime for what it is, then you lose credibility. That's typically how it works in society. Doesn't matter if you mingle with other reputable folks, they'll remember you for mucking around with the slimy ones -- as it should be.
Gee, I hope that clears things up for you.
Accredited franchising status - fair franchising seal - it's all an indistinguishable morass of nonsense.
Which Brass Bob award you get is beside the point.The fact is that a real bad orgabnization received some form of accreditatrion from an organization that claims it is serving a positive purppose in vetting franchises.
--
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
Michael Webster PhD LLB
Franchise News
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
The recent reported events coming out of the AAFD's Conference tells me all i need to know about the AAFD.
Cuppy's is a den of thieves, and the AAFD continues to invite them into their house.
You can split hairs all you want to try and make the elephant in the room go away but it's not going anywhere.
in the world of franchising? People need to fully understand their UFOC/FDD. You are doing the right thing studying the world of franchising which many do not do. To really understand their disclosures you have to understand the franchising world. Makes a big difference.
Why do you thing the AAFD is dangerous? Is it they promote franchising with the statement of fair business practices?
The only way to get transparency in franchising is work in the choice of business for 6 months. (This is what Webster, Solomon and many of the people here on BMM) suggest.
Do they just promote franchising? Is there no talk about the problems in franchising? I have never been a part of something like this. I am interested. Is it just a social gathering?
A false sense of security- this is one of the sales techniques they use to reel you in.
I believe good zors would be honest and tell their zees what they need to do to make an educated decision to sign or not to sign.
Frankly, I was shocked to learn that anyone from Cuppys was present at this conference.
This is what I know from my readings and research about Cuppys:
A) There are multiple families tonight who are on the cusp of losing their homes and/or filing for bankruptcy due to the fact that their Cuppy's deposit has not been refunded.
B) Pretty much every Cuppys franchisee is struggling for survival. The new owner said as much just last week - and has committed to focusing all resources on existing center profitability.
C) Multiple members of Cuppy's new ownership group are in Virginia attending a conference – and are up on stage singing and delivering mea culpa speeches.
D) They are attending a conference of a group which supposedly focuses on "fair franchising" standards...with a standards compass admittedly fixated on the SALES PROCESS and FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS versus ongoing franchise relations - as decried countless times on these boards by the AAFD leadership.
If Cuppy's new CEO is indeed a man of his word (focused on settling the outstanding refund issue and existing unit profitability) and AAFD is truly interested in promoting fair franchising then:
1. Why in the world would anyone at Cuppys spend a single dollar or a minute of their time attending a meeting that has absolutely nothing to do with these immediate stated needs? Sorry - "the old guys booked the flights and hotel" isn't a good enough excuse.
2. Why in the world would the AAFD provide a forum to a group which has proclaimed a moratorium on new franchise sales and franchise agreement signing? Sorry - "they paid their dues and had a table at the dinner” isn't a good enough excuse. Why wasn’t Cuppys uninvited and their fees refunded with the agreement to disperse all monies back to those awaiting their refund?
3. Why would any member of the "standards" committee spend a single moment pondering or debating Cuppy's continued inclusion as a "member in good standing"? Is this even a question to be pondered?!? Wouldn't time be better spent fixing the obviously broken system which allowed Cuppys to be designated in the first place? With what is already known, isn’t it an obvious slam dunk decision to invite Cuppy’s back for consideration only after they make good on the outstanding issues?
I admit to not knowing all of the nitty gritty - I beg someone, anyone, to point out my errors. Please explain why anyone should take the AAFD seriously as long as they continue to keep Cuppys in the fold.
Excellent post by Don and comments from Dan. As much as I appreciate the ribald humor and madcap self-parody that the AAFD & Cuppy's continue to provide (Don, please tell us what songs they sang. Even Rich Quick can't outdo these guys.), is anyone else a bit uncomfortable about what this situation is indicating about our industry?
It's incredible that a year later we should even have to point out the minimum steps that should taken immediately:
1) Cuppy's Coffee should give people back their money. This includes anyone still owed from Java Jo'z. If they have to set up a payment plan, fine, but they should pay them back in full, plus interest. No bogus deductions. No gag orders to keep them from sharing whether the payments are being made. No "We're not responsible for Morg Morgan when he was wearing his Java Jo'z golf cap" If Dale Nabors is the stand-up guy we hope he is, it's time for him to stand up. I'll be the first to praise him for making things right.
Criston Menz ($35,900) and Robyn Rivera ($30,000) have documented their current runaround in interviews on UnhappyFranchisee.com. Another couple from CA (Lina & Lee - $35,900) have left a comment, and I'm sure Dale has a list of how many others are out there (Just look in Morg's filing cabinet under Whoopee! Free Money!). This is happening now, on Dale's watch.
2) Cuppy's Coffee should declare the same policy for the people who have yet to come forward. There are undoubtedly more Cristons, Robyns and Linas who gave deposits in 2007 who haven't yet realized what they've stepped in.
3) Elite/Cuppy's/Medina should not take deposits until a franchisee has financing secured and a location lined up. If deposits are collected, they should use a 3rd party escrow and have payouts at particular benchmarks.
4) The AAFD should insitute procedures that protect the interests not only of unborn franchisees but the credibility and investments of time and money made by their franchisor, franchisee, and professional members. One would think that non-profit status would require procedures for implementation of the stated mission so that it was not, simply, a platform for one man to further the for-profit interests of his cronies... even if said cronies are needed to fill in that difficult baritone harmony at the banquet.
4) If the AAFD has changed its mission to serve the interests of those who pinky-swear they're gonna be really, really fair this year, and allow them to use the AAFD logo despite their admitted noncompliance, Mr. Purvin should notify the current AAFD members before they continue to invest their time, money and professional credibility.
Perhaps a name change would be a good start. How about: AAFD: Association for the Advancement of Fraud & Deception?
Our well-intentioned blogging and exposing of misdeeds and miscreants may have an unintended negative consequence. If the naughty boys are given awards, rather than being censured, what does that say about franchising and the ethics and professionalism of those associated with it? Even pirates, the Mafia and Hell's Angels have codes of ethics and rules of conduct, guys.
Even the shadowy figures among us have a vested interest in saying enough's enough!
Sean Kelly
seankelly[at]ideafarm.net
Franchise Pick
seankelly@ideafarm.net
IdeaFarm, Franchise Pick
Franchisor Marketing
I am amazed that you, of all people, have any expectations that the AAFD represents significant substance in franchising.
Alvin and the Chipmunks are and have always been absolutely useless pretenders. They are to franchising as FEMA is to disaster relief.
If the AAFD gives its "awards" (what a joke that is!) to miscreants, that is precisely in character and revealing of what the AAFD is really all about - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
FORGETABOUTIT! The AAFD is and always will be simply ridiculous.--
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School
I know...
I guess I knew, deep down, that my vision of a violent coup, with the ex-presidente and supporters barricading themselves in the Cuppy's Suite with piles of golf bags, logoed promotional products and boxes of accredited contracts, was not premonition.
Deep down inside, I knew that Don Sniegowski, Michael Webster and Paul Steinberg would not put on the fatigues and Fidel Castro beards I had sent to their hotel rooms (though they probably smoked the cigars). It just was a darn fine fantasy while it lasted...
Viva la revolucion!
Sean Kelly
seankelly@ideafarm.net
Franchise Pick
seankelly@ideafarm.net
IdeaFarm, Franchise Pick
Franchisor Marketing
Everyone on BMM has written things like zees never do anything.
Yes I believe more Cuppy zee's should of been at that meeting and dicussing their many problems.
All I can speak is from my personal experience and talking to many hurt zees in other systems.
It is hard for people to understand why people do things after being hurt from loss, unless you have been there.
Many whom are hurt zees feel no hope or lost their faith in their fellow human beings. Their positive attitude has been deminished. They are afraid of people. When someone has hurt your family monetary and you emotionally you do not trust your judgement. You have to rebuild you confidence to even mingle with people . So how can they be open about their problems? No one wants to hear it do they? Plus no one cares.
The monetary hurt is nothing compared to the emotional scares that are created. If you recently been hurt the wound is open and you are still bleeding. There is no band aide for emotional wounds.
I can understand why no one from Cuppy's spend a single moment pondering or debating Cuppy's continued inclusion as a as "member in good standing." Yes their system is broken but the people themselves are broken. Many people have an attitude if we do not talk about it, things will get better and the problems will go away.
All good points Dan. As the situation has developed we have gained the opportunity for Don's reporting and have lifted the lid a bit for a look inside the AAFD and Cuppy's. It will be interesting to review the perspective from Bob Purvin or anyone who will speak for the AAFD.
--
JimB