Thankyou FuwaFuwaUsagi ----Academic Research Franchising

This book, "The Economics of Franchising" is probably a very well done study of franchising but, of course, it doesn't expose "managed churning" that is permissible under the UFOC's and really doesn't indicate the truth that four out of five small businesses fail within the first five years. Academic Research walks the thin line of trying to support the status quo and yet tell the truth, if not the whole truth. The old red herring of the independent business vs. the franchised business as a statistic is thrown out there always to confuse the real issue and the truth that four out of five small businesses will fail in five years, both independent and franchised businesses. Actually, after the fact, I read several CPA's who indicate that four out of five small businesses fail within the first five years. Who would know better than the CPA's, who apparently don't work for the government. I believe that there is cooperation between the FTC and the IFA and the brokers not to spread this figure around. If prospective franchisees knew the actual statistics, as demonstrated by first-generation franchisees who fail within the first five years, and which statistics are NOT required to be disclosed by the franchisors to prospective buyers, they wouldn't, of course, pony up their houses and their 403's and 401's and their sasvings for the American Dream. The Congress snd the Department of Commerce and the FTC know this and yet they provide the appearance of regulating franchising to disclose the risk to the propspective buyer and they have the nerve and the gall to call it an investment. If the small franchised business stands two, three, or five years before failure, it does feed the economy and the franchisors and the job market, and franchisees are a calculated sacrifice under public policy and the status quo. The UFOC's and the FA's are designed to protect the franchisors from not clearly disclosing the KNOWN statistical risk of the investments, and to transfer the duty and obligation to the buyer through the phoney baloney of the Item 20 references. Disgusting practice by the government of the people who calculates and condones the sacrifice of some of the people to the profits of some of the corporate people. Even the FTC says ---"IF POSSIBLE" check this UFOC out with your CPA or an attorney (or something like this. The FTC knows, of course, that the visibility and the appearance of government endorsement will provide plenty of "marks", who will not do their due diligence and discover the risk, for the franchisors and the brokers who do not talk about success or risk in any statistical terms. It will always be the failure of the ZEE not to do their due diligence and not the failure of the ZOR to disclose the actual risk. This is why Truth in Franchising Blogger cannot say that he does not sell high risk franchises to the public. This is why the SBA will guarantee loans at almost any risk and this is why the banks are willing to loan, etc... It is only the failed franchisee who is the log on the fire of development who fails. The government doesn't fail, the banks don't fail, the franchisor doesn't fail. Fuwa! you are an honest man! Does the end justify the means? Could franchising be regulated as well as securities and still survive?