UPS Store Independent Association Sends Invitation to Franchisee Council

Seems to me you have a lot of bluster but no substance.

We have two very large networks, Quiznos and The UPS Store who are in trouble because of their greed and the fact that ZORS survive on policies that favor the profits of the ZORS even if these same policies arbitrarily destroy ZEES. They are in trouble also because public policy and the UFOC's permit them to sell unviable business opportunities (unviable for the ZEES) to increase and maximize ZOR profits at the expense of the ZEE investor who takes the entire risk and loss. They are in trouble because the UFOC's permit them to obscure the actual failure or success rate of first-generation franchisees from NEW first-generation franchisees and they are permitted to churn and turn with impunity and immunity under the law until their flawed business plan finally catches up with them.

ZEES are greatly disadvantaged under the law because of the air-tight contracts of adhesion that they sign. They sign them because they have no idea that they are negotiable and believe that every ZEE stands equally unequal in their relationship to the ZOR. They haven't heard that the contract/UFOC is negotiable and in large networks, generally, the FA's are not
negotiable.

When there is trouble for the ZEE only and the ZORS won't talk or react, there are only two courses of action available to ZEES. ZEES can try to negotiate in good faith or they can go to the courts in good faith. In some troubled networks, ZEES don't survive to do either and this favors the ZORS. It is cheaper for ZEES to try to talk than it is to go to court. Attoneys who take on ZORS have to be very committed and patient because even the procedural rules greatly favor the ZORS who use these rules to keep ZEES away from the courts and away from juries who tend to think the law is about justice.

Decisions in Arbitration and the case law surrounding franchising greatly favors the ZORS who feed the economies of the States. ZORS are aware, always, that they hold the Aces and this emboldens predatory ZORS who can always defend their bottom lines through a body of case law in state and federal courts that overwhelmingly favors ZORS. The ZORS know that public policy stands in their corner and that ZEES are sacrificed under public policy.

The public, at large, doesn't understand franchising and many have no idea that these big brand names do not have ownership in the stores that wear their brand names. This blurring of identities also favors the ZORS and the ZEES and neither do anything to educate the public.

The main media ignores franchise fraud and franchise litigation and it is only in the trade journals on franchising that are read by the insiders that there is any disclosure of what is going on in the franchising world. When Forbes or other large business publications pick up stories about franchisee failure, they don't follow through to the conclusion of the matter and these ZEES fade into obscurity and bankruptcy.

Even ZEES who may have small wins are never made "whole" because of the necessity of the state to look to the "greater good" of the public which means that the ZOR must continue to stand in the economy. The ability to deliver the "greater good" seems always to be found in the law and in the franchise agreements that favor the ZORS in arbitration and in the courts.

Richard Solomon is absolutely correct, the only real solution is NOT TO MAKE A BAD DEAL TO BEGIN WITH. Those ZEES who look to negotiation or to the arbiters or the courts to remedy a BAD DEAL and to find justice will only find public policy that favors the ZORS.

We will watch what happens with these two big franchise networks and we have to hope that both of these networks will be prevented by government from the MALICIOUS selling of NEW franchises through the front door until their problems are solved.

The prevention of the sale of a flawed business opportunity with little chance of success was the original purpose of the FTC franchise Rule in the late 1970's! wasn't it?

KOOLAIDE!!!! GET YER FRESH KOOLAIDE HERE!!!!

UPS franchisees should rally around and support their FAC and focus on the brand and the system. They cannot win the war and UPS can afford to lose or sell the system. While it may seem exciting for the franchisees to show UPS no mercy and punish them it is just not in the cards to achieve a victory in this fashion.

But Mr. Rodriguez has to try to negotiate a solution with MBE-UPS out of court because it certainly can't be in the best interests of UPS to let this network of stores fail through attrition, can it? They need these stores to compete with FedEx Kinko and to protect their market, don't they?

Negotiation, rather than legal action, is always in the best interests of the franchisee, the owner of the store, because in failure, the store owner loses everything. In litigation, the franchisees don't do very well because case law and precedent appears always to favor the franchisors. It costs money to litigate and most franchisees, who are distressed anyway, can't afford to litigate and negotiation is their only recourse.

If UPS allows the stores to fail, wouldn't they be admitting that they bought MBE only to profit from the investments of the franchisees with no regard to the viability of The UPS Store that they would sell as a franchise with their famous brand name?

What do you think?

Drastic due diligence is required to ferret out the poor investments. 

Only chance for change is to get the UPS STORE network or at least 50% to stop accepting dropp-offs for one month. This will open up a can of whop ass on the brownies and then and only then will you start your short term negoiations. Its all about DROP-OFFS and nothing else!