Why does the everyone keep saying that franchises are "proven systems".
Using the word "proven" is gratuitous and self serving. I have not seen one UFOC that provides enough data to the use the word "proven" in any description. Perhaps, you can point to some grand fathers of the franchising industry that can justify the use of "proven" only because historical data and shareholder approval, but most franchises get a lot of mileage out of throwing the term "proven" around with no means of backing up the word.
I will go even further and submit that some concepts are the opposite of "proven" and that they are non-viable from the first day the doors are open. And even worse, over an extended period time - after adding increasing product costs, increasing wages, added competition (in and out of the system) - that the viability falls even further.