Proven Systems?
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.
Even systems with hundreds or thousands of stores can fall into the non-proven category as the franchiser attempts to pile additional requirements (fees) and modifications onto the franchise system with no regard to the bottom line. I challenge the AAFD to make part of the accreditation process the task of providing sufficient data to justify that the Franchise is a "proven system". If a franchise system wants to use the "proven", I say "ok, then show it". The franchiser cannot just point to corporate stores and "see" without coughing up the data behind those stores to justify their success.
How about - as part of the accreditation process that the Average Unit Expenses be reported along with the Average Unit Volume? Those franchises (franchiser and franchisee) who have been sensitive to the bottom line of the brand will have nothing to fear by providing this data. Include the Average Unit Utilities, Average Unit Lease Cost, Average Unit Labor, Average Unit Product Costs. These values weighed against the Average Unit Volume will give the franchiser, the franchisee, the market analysts and any future investor a snap shot of how "proven" the system really is. Each of these numbers will be an indicator to how well the franchiser and franchisee have done during the quarter at working TOGETHER in promoting the brand.
Over a period of time the Brand improves in stability and quality because to attract future investors the franchiser will need to ensure that the reported Unit Averages reflected a truly "proven system".
I know, I know - don't hold your breath on that one….but it felt good thinking about how good it could be.
-jm
- Franchise topic:

What an easier world it would be to know system-wide financials, average bottom-line earnings, turnover in franchise units, and more. You are on target, jbmont60. I'm with 'ya, and welcome!
Frankman
Wonder if litigation exposure will dissuade any brokers or zors from using the "proven system" pitch...
Paul Steinberg, Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
System wide operating unit financials and turmnover stats should be a minimum disclosure requirement. However, numbers can be configured to support a position, at least to some extent.
If a zor is going to claim a proven concept the standard of disclosure should be to reveal the financial character of the system to the exclusion of misleading data and statements. The zor is then free to meet that standard as they see fit. The task of the zor and zees then becomes to find compatibilty so they can move forward as partners with a mutual understanding of disclosed historical risks. Zees can find out what the zor is doing to support the system and the zor can find zees capable of implementing the brand concept succesfully.
I believe a very high number of people pursuing their dream do so with a believe and succeed attitude. That is not a shot at Dale. If you are considering your own business as a zee or an independent you are confident of your ability and expect to be successful. Independently you are on your own. You perform due dilligence to the extent you recognize it. A zor needs to meet a higher standard not to mislead no matter how that may be done.
--
JimB
Abdicating responsibility?
Noone here is suggesting that the franchisee is abdicating the responsibility of due diligence, the overall risk or day to day operations of the business. Nor is the suggestion that when a franchisee fails it is not the utlimately the responsibility of the franchisee, although, the thought of "straightening deck chairs on the titanic" comes to mind with some of these systems.
This request is actually pretty obvious in it's intention, that is, publish the Unit Averages so that the public can analyze why a "proven" system has a 52% failure rate, 33% on the transfer list and a wake of bankrupt investors. If this were a market securities issue, 60 minutes, 20/20 and the morning shows would be all over it.
There is a word used for advertising and selling investements based on false or undisclosed information - and that F-word is pretty well used by Mr. Purvin.
-jm
This can't be correct. I would have to see the court's full opinion to appreciate reasoning that flies in the face of everything we now know.
There is no double jeopardy defense to a civil action based upon conduct that has already been tried in a criminal case, regadless of the outcome in the criminal case. That is true in every state and in the Federal system.
By way of illustration, O J Simpson was acquitted of murder in a criminal case, but was amenable to trial on the same conduct in a later civil case which he lost. Under the antitrust laws, a justice department criminal conviction obtained against a defendant can be used in later civil litigation to establish the plaintiff's prima facie case.
This whole double jeopardy statement doesn't make any sense.
Richard Solomon
www.FranchiseRemedies.com
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
It was probably in some county trial court with some bozo judge and the case got settled without an appeal court ever seeing it. Either that or the story is wrong.
Like all states, Florida has some really superb state court trial judges and some that are there for reasons other than capability.
Richard Solomon
www.FranchiseRemedies.com
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
How the criminal case comes out in the end doesn't matter. Double jeopardy is all about having to be tried twice - both criminally. Once the jury is impanelled, jeopardy attaches and that's it. There are exceptions, but they are for unusual circumstances.
All of this has nothing to do with the two bite issues in Maryland.
In The CB case with R&D, the rescission offer tendered included a release clause. If you release a claim, that's it - it's over. I have a feeling that DLA sneaked that release language into the rescission offer and that release language may not have been specifically authorized by the enforcement agency. But that too is beside the point, as R&D declined to accept the rescission offer. That makes the offer moot. A refused offer is the same as no offer having been made. So their situation isn't about two bites. Had they acccepted a rescission offer without a release clause, then the two bite issue might be there to deal with. As it stands now, however, two bite questions are not part of the R&D war with CB.
Richard Solomon
www.FranchiseRemedies.com
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
If you find a lawyer who is like Jesus, hire him/her.
Richard Solomon
www.FranchiseRemedies.com
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
That's why we're in here - to try to educate folks and make that situation start to change.
Richard Solomon
www.FranchiseRemedies.com
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
Yep. RAISIN DATES, that's why we're here.
Anyone hungry?
My girlfriend actually does that very effectively.
Richard Solomon
www.FranchiseRemedies.com
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 you thought I was just being my usual flippant self.I wasn't. Consider the perspective of just one of the cats:
http://www.seamusmuldoon.com/puddins_gospel.htm
Richard A. Solomon
www.FranchiseRemedies.com
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,
We have not bonded as of yet, but I do read and consider what you have to say once in awhile. I know I joined this comment stream a few months late, but I thought this was really about pigs..
not little freakin kitty cats!
Franpro
Franpro is:
Joel Libava, President
Franchise Selection Specialists Inc.
Cleveland, Ohio
The cats come to me for advice even more than franchisees -
http://www.seamusmuldoon.com/the_feast_of_saint_belinda.htm
Richard Solomon
www.FranchiseRemedies.com
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