Criticisms of Citizen Journalism
Blue MauMau is approaching its third anniversary on November 4. As editor, that puts me in a reflective mood of what this news site can do to become a better news journal and community.
The site is free. But for it to properly work, each reader needs to participate and share their experiences. We will do the rest to make sure that you get a lot more information and a higher quality news than you put in.
In the spirit of transparency, let me list four major criticisms Blue MauMau receives regarding our site's information and news content.
Criticism #1. Blue MauMau allows anonymous guest postings, and those guests are critical. - Franchisor
Nope. Not entirely. Anonymous posters cannot report news stories and they cannot contribute blogs. Anonymous guests can only post in the forum discussions and comments under the articles.
Such public comments, if they are critical, are something that drives some franchisors crazy.
Allowing anonymous postings is typical for the Internet. My local paper has allowed its readers to post anonymously for years. BusinessWeek recently moved to allow public comments under its articles. One notable exception to this rule is The Wall Street Journal, which still insists on subscribers using their real names to post.
One wonders how long the Journal's practice will hold on the Internet.
Some franchisors may deal very harshly with a known franchise owner, who posts an unflattering remark about their franchise system.That is why being anonymous is important to an honest dialog on the investment worthiness of a franchise concept.
Criticism #2: Content is posted freely by anyone so Blue MauMau's news can be unreliable. - Industry Leader
Blue MauMau's news is only published by reporters and deputized members. Each article goes through an editing process.
Stories are written with the thought that our target audience are franchise owners and investors.
Our reporters strive to provide more than one side of a story. It should be noted that sometimes the other side does not want to respond.
In addition, Blue MauMau strives to provide supporting documents. That way the reader can click on the same word document that went out to an employee or franchisee. This is something that the Internet easily can offer but that other trade publications do not provide.
Criticism #3. Blue MauMau is tough to write for. Its members and guests are quickly able to find weaknesses in my article. I'm not used to that. - Trade Journalist
Some reporters who write for well-known journals have told me how difficult it is to write an article for Blue MauMau because they aren’t used to the level of scrutiny that Blue MauMau members deliver to its articles. Flaws or inconsistencies are found out by some brilliant readers. What that means is if an article declares a bubble of beliefs without hard evidence and credibility, the flaw, and sometimes the author, will quickly be called out.
Some authors and leaders can become angry when their statements and franchise beliefs are challenged in public comments.
Criticism #4: Blue MauMau does not cover the franchise issues of my industry and franchise system well. - Franchise Owner
Ah, this is a big concern for me as well. We are a news and information model based on citizen journalism, people who write for free on what they know and see. Without citizen participation, the site becomes blind to that franchise system and specific sector.
What I am saying is just as you get the government you deserve so do you get the investment news you deserve.
For example, Blue MauMau has connections with a number of world-class experts and leaders in the quick print industry who could provide insights into questions like -- Where is the quick print industry going? What systems have the most profitable franchisees? Are the reported numbers real? Who has some of the worst franchise agreements? What models are working best?
Quick print franchisees initiate the news process by first showing interest and contributing. That allows the editor to use publishing tools to leverage their comments. And where franchisees post, Blue MauMau's reporters and members can help bring in world-class experts and franchisor leaders to follow. A dialog begins to take shape. New investment information and important news stories that are not covered elsewhere can be more fully developed.
As a result, quick print franchise investors will be much more informed than when they started, all because they contributed a small drop of information or a question that begat a river of answers.
- Franchise topic:
- Enter Your Own Tag:
You may want to place a free advertisement in Blue MauMau's classified ad section to try to get the attention of franchisor recruiters. However, this is a site that focuses on the needs of franchise owners and not franchisor needs. Those of us here do not care so much about information on selling a franchise as much as how to spot a good investment, run a successful franchise unit(s) and the elements of a con that lead to a bad investment.
With the credit crunch upon us, franchisors have been letting go of staff because would-be buyers cannot get access to credit (loans). Some of the hardest hit are franchise development staff (sales) and marketers. Since fewer people are buying franchises, senior managers are focusing more on improving franchise operations for franchisor revenues via royalties. However, that isn't to say that operation managers aren't being laid off as well.
I'll link to a few articles that show this so you don't have to take my word.
In regards to your question about recruiters, here is my list of franchisor headhunters for senior-level managers by order of service reputation:
Good luck.
Mike,
Funny comment, but since the guest poster apprears to have the intellect of an empty box, he probably won't catch on.
Guest,
Regarding mental horsepower, after reading your posts, it's obvious you came here unarmed. Your lack of intellect shines again in assuming any investment of mine didn’t work out.
Regarding the mat, you didn't even get close. It takes little skill to belittle others, and as you have proven, that is all the skill you have.
I challenge you to name the franchise your with. If you have indeed been a 25 year franchise vet name the franchises you consider are great investments and why. I am sure many would love to hear the wisdom you have accumulated with all those years in franchising.
I am not anti-franchising. I am against using unethical business practices to get people into franchising. There is a difference. A good zor uses their money to develop a system that has worked for years. Then they sell the system with their zee's best interest at hand. There are too many who are after quick money on the backs of the hard working people of our country. Those are the one's people need to read about and stay away from.
I forgot to say I think you hate people telling their true life experiences in franchising because it is a threat to your business. You must be from a Franwack franchise.
Assuming arguendo, that "25-year franchise veteran" is in fact an accurate self description, and further assuming that everyone else on BMM is "morons, 'never was' consultants and attorneys and hacks"....
....how does this show factual, logical, or jurisprudential flaws in the comments which so trouble our "franchise veteran"?
And even assuming arguendo that there are such flaws: The reality is that this site alone draws more than twice as many unique viewers as the leading franchise industry print publication.
Moreover, the demographic of this and similar sites is one which impacts franchisors in the pocketbook; it is prospective purchasers and current zees rather than zors and zor-side attorneys discussing who is the best-dressed or which attorneys own what breed of dog.
You can curse the darkness or bring a flashlight.
If this self-proclaimed "veteran" finds inaccuracy or imbalance, then specify what is inaccurate and/or contribute an article to provide balance.
This site is much more than comments, it has articles on current developments, and some of the Franchipedia entries on topics such as Pretextual Termination and Franchise Regulation and Summary Judgment are introductory definitions which, IMHO, strive to be not simply be objective statements of the current legal and political climate, but to present the competing views of zor and zee.
Taking those 3 BMM postings as an example, I would ask our "veteran" to tell us what is "unreliable, unfair, [or] anti-franchising" in those posts.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Paul Steinberg, Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Guest writes: "The simple fact is that most franchisees win and some don't. Not my data, but the data compiled by PRICEWATERHOUSE COOPERS."
There is nothing in either the 2001 nor 2008 Pricewatehouse Coopers report that talks about franchisee compensation.
The reports, commissioned by the IFA, are designed to show the economic reach of franchising as a whole - an odd choice for an organization determined to resist regulation and who proclaims that franchising is not an industry.
But you are not alone in asserting that the IFA report revealed something about franchise failure rates.
It is clear from this post at Linked In, in which a person asks, "I am looking for data on the percentage of franchised businesses that fail versus the percentage of non franchised businesses that fail" that there is considerable confusion still out there. An authority on franchising, Lee Plave, gave the same wrong answer.
Chapter 2 of Blair and LaFontaine's book on the Economics of Franchising is a good place to start when trying to answer the question about finanical fitness of franchising.
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, who publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises, called "The BizOp News"
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
Guest--
The link you provide talks about the size of franchising in terms of dollars produced, jobs, etc. On first glance, it says absoutely NOTHING about profitability for the franchisee. The data presented in no way supports your claim that "The simple fact is that most franchisees win and some don't," an argument that could very well be true. Just because a franchise system shows growth in units or in sales revenue doesn't mean that the franchisees are making any money.
So, why don't you create greater balance by enlightening us with some posts about franchisees who win and franchisors who win (but not at the expense of their franchisees).
BTW, it's empirical.....
You ask,
"How do these jobs, dollars, output, and everything discussed in this OBJECTIVE DETAILED REPORT BY A REPUTABLE CONSULTING FIRM get produced if franchisees aren't making money".(?)
Just because a business is extremely large and generates a great deal of gross revenue from a vast array of products and services while employing a great number of people does not make it profitable or reputable.... Ask Ford, General Motors, AIG, Wachovia, Enron, Lehman Brothers, etc.
As for your final comment, "Why is it the life long ambition of BMM posters to be blind and dumb"?
Two answers---1. Because it bothers us that you got there first.
2. Because if we achieve blindness, we would be spared your posts.
Seriously, all franchise opportunities are not created equal. Many provide the framework within which individuals make a more than comfortable living. Others are gimmicks or frauds disguised as business models hiding behind the shelter of misinterpreted statistics and false self-promotion, churning locations and leaving the human and economic costs in their wake. To rail against those who attempt to expose scoundrels is dumb. To simply deny that those scoundrels exist in the franchising industry is selective blindness.
Guest writes: "How do these jobs, dollars, output, and everything discussed in this OBJECTIVE DETAILED REPORT BY A REPUTABLE CONSULTING FIRM get produced if franchisees aren't making money. Franchisee profitability is the sustainable factor."
Uh, well as we have consistently point out here and other places, the most important empirical question is whether franchisees are being rewarded on a risk adjusted basis.
A franchisee's margin of profit can be opportunistically reduced by the franchisor to the point where it makes economic sense to continue to recover the large sunk costs, but the return is not commensurate with the risk.
Without industry wide, consistent, and comparable Item 19 disclosure, we have no way of judging "franchisee profitability". (All of this doesn't depend on your view of the harm of churning.)
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, who publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises, called "The BizOp News"
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
A couple great comments and insights by Webster in response to some bad reasoning from the guest.
Professor Lafontaine of the University of Michigan explains a basic flaw of the PricewaterhouseCoopers study that concludes franchised enterprises are creating so much economic output. She explains why that is not so, saying:
"Franchises are an organizational form. You cannot say that there is this much business because of franchising anymore than licensing. In other words, there would still be restaurants out there if there was not franchising. It is not that franchising is creating all of this [economic activity]." - IFA Study Shows Franchising Is Strong
It would be very easy to make fun of the grammar (or lack thereof) in Guest's Criticism 5 post.
"The so called experts are by large morons..." for example.
The point that Guest attempts to make is incorrect, however, grammar notwithstanding. No one can "give this site journalistic credibility", that has to be earned. The contributors to this site range from the incredibly intelligent and erudite to those that cannot complete an intelligible sentence. That is part of the attraction, as is the fact that any disenchanted individual with a keyboard can vent frustration and anger anonymously, bloviating with only the inevitable reaction of the other readers to fear.
If you as a "25-year franchise veteran" have such a distaste for BlueMauMau, you needn't feel compelled to log on. (You're only supporting the site by doing so, incidentally). Those of us who do visit regularly will gladly sift through the delightfully nonsensical babblings in order to cull the information and opinion that we find valuable.
I think that the "large morons" might have been referring to Webster & Sniegowski.
I told them they needed to cut back on the Krispy Kremes and get to the gym more often.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Paul Steinberg, Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Your humor is never ending.
Guest,
With all do respect, your comment is not all true.
Potential franchisees are smart intelligent capable people?Based on what? Yes there are smart, intelligent, capable franchisees, but to lump them all into one category is unrealistic.
Most franchisors are honest? Again, based on what? I do believe there are a bunch of good franchise investments out there. Whether or not they are honest is another issue.There is a lot of puffery in your statement and as we all know, puffery is difficult to prove.
There are a number of problems with BBM being a resource for prospective franchisees.
But, when guest writes, As a 25-year franchise veteran I find Blue Mau Mau to be the most unreliable, unfair, anti-franchising, character assassins, he or she confirms the value of BMM.
The major value of BMM, and I might add the AAFD, is the devotion to transparency.
Guest is so afraid of writing at BMM, being a 25 year veteran, he or she cannot even sign in and post under a real name!
BMM has issued in an era of transparency in franchising. Serious criticism of franchise systems and their economic basis is to be welcomed.
Most franchise systems will embrace this challenge. Some will fail to make the grade.
Good brands have nothing to fear - crappy brands have everything to fear. Which is at it should be.
But it is no longer possible to hide behind press releases and puff news stories.
Even the very best franchise brands are going to have to learn to navigate this new era of transparency.
And as one of the experts on this site, I look forward to when Guest feels secure enough to sign in and join the debate in full.
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, who publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises, called "The BizOp News", at www.bizop.ca
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
Guest writes: "BMM is transparent. How else can I draw the conclusion that posters are a bunch of unreliable, hysterical, anti-franchising morons?"
Because trolls don't read posts, they can "draw" any conclusion that they want, be it ever so devoid of facts or logic.
The point was that BMM has made franchising more transparent, which annoys a great deal of people who had pecuniary interests in maintaining the illusions.
But, please keep up your ranting - it is an excellent demonstration of your skills.
Don, guest poster's IP number please ....
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, who publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises, called "The BizOp News", at www.bizop.ca
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
Knowing our privacy policy, Mr. Webster has set this up nicely. Thank you.
What Webster is talking about is that IP addresses (e.g. 291.92.92.XX), an address that identifies a computer or TCP/IP network device, are recorded on server logs. Blue MauMau has a dedicated server. Only we access our logs. We usually would only look at malicious IP addresses that look like they may be hammering our server many times a second in order to overload the hardware and bring the site down. Such cyber-attacks are illegal. Such abuse is far removed from the patterns of a normal user.
Our introduction page says, "Your information stays with us and will never be given to others." And we mean it. For anonymous guests, whether franchisor CEO, industry leader, or franchisee, your information is safe. For registered members, the email address that you used during registration will not be shared.
One word of caution: If you want to stay anonymous, writers should be careful on what they reveal about themselves in comments.
Mr. Blue MauMau
Editor
You know that Mr. MauMau never reveals IP and does not even store them.
I say good for him. We may have a third-world socialist economy, but we still have the First Amendment and a healthy respect for speech.
(Except for Canucks; when they get to be a nuisance, we ship 'em off to Gitmo)
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Paul Steinberg, Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Paul writes: "You know that Mr. MauMau never reveals IP and does not even store them."
I know that, you know that, you know I know that, but our troll poster doesn't know that -- until now, blabber mouth. LOL.
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, who publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises, called "The BizOp News", at www.bizop.ca
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
Troll, the chances of you "spelling" out a detailed plan are small.
But, please keep posting to demonstrate just how small you are.
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, who publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises, called "The BizOp News"
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
At some point this morning, I opined--
"The contributors to this site range from the incredibly intelligent and erudite to those that cannot complete an intelligible sentence".
You then wrote--
"A true with wouldn't need me to spell it out".
I hope not, because spelling doesn't seem to be your strong suit.....
Half imbecile, half ignoramus
What's more, half scoundrel, don't forget.
But on that score the man gives promise
That he will make a whole one yet.--
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
Guest,
You got that right! BMM is transparent. And in my opinion that is the objective.
Since most news columns I read elsewhere are mostly biased articles, BMM becomes a refreshing change towards the underlying truth (good or bad). To some, that truth is hard to swallow.
OTOH, your comment about us all being unreliable, hysterical, anti-franchising morons is way off base. This of course helps me to understand who you are, which is very transparent.
protest when anyone points out their flaws.
When open analysis that is without an agenda to sell franchises addresses any franchise, its weaknesses will come out into the light.
The analysis may be qualitative in that the investment prospects are dealt with in terms of their potential longevity and riskiness.
It may be - and usually is - quantitative in that those who can provide direct observation of facts tell us what those facts are. These are usualy franchisees who are the direct observers of franchisor opportunism at the expense of the franchisees who made their investments in the trust and hope that they would not be robbed of the investment reward opportunities that the franchisor promised them when the sale was being made.
When you think of the stories - that we know are true - about Quiznos, Cuppys, various fitness franchises, Dagwood Sandwiches, and so on and so forth - the value of Blue Mau Mau is obvious.
If this were just some IFA, pro franchisor rag, the people who take the trouble to try to educate on this forum simply wouldn't bother. Hell - they wouldn't even be allowed to say what needs to be said. It is not one sided. When the AAFD endorsed an obvious fraud - to get a fee - that was also exposed here.
This is - to my knowledge - the only - yes ONLY - place to which a potential franchise investor has free access to resources that are hard fact and very astute analysis of the investment opportunities being put forth by the many charlatans of the franchise industry, whether on the franchisor side or the franchisee side. Hopefully, one day no one will invest in any franchise without coming here for an eye opening reality check.--
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
Crit5 ranter tells us he has been around for 25 years and then y'all waste time justifying the existence of BMM to someone that lies through his teeth. I don't understand that? Why respond to an idiot who wants to suggest franchising fraud should not be exposed. He may not have actually lied because he isn't specific about anything the implications are there. He also hasn't mentioned the name of his squeaky clean franchise system?
Anyone with any real franchising background, even those in legitimate franchising, know that franchising can be very dirty and very dirty franchising doesn't help legitimate franchising. Getting rid of dirty franchising helps legitimate franchising. Therefore; squeaky clean 25 year Crit5 ranter should consider BMM as an asset and worthy of a sizable donation.
I recently published an article on a very good franchisor in Australia and blow me down ... BMM published it.
The alternative to BMM is SFA. Now that would be a sad day for many people. BMM saves people. BMM exposes and compares and educates. It doesn't attack unless an attack is warranted to expose, compare and educate when a scam destroys lives. This site doesn't exist for the fun of it ... it exists because 25 year Crit5 shonks are out there.
Troll writes: "but I wouldn't count on it."
You have added counting to your spelling ability?
Who knew.
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, who publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises, called "The BizOp News"
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
Perhaps there is some bias here just as there are with most other articles and sites. I just wouldn't discredit it like guest does as nonsense.