Due Diligence
The subject of exercising proper due diligence, that is to say to thoroughly research a franchise system before buying one, is being brought up on almost every legal article. It is such an important and long-standing issue that it warrants its own forum area so that the topic can be properly explored.
Below is a discussion on the need of due diligence, resources for it, how to do it and its limitations.
Obama & Borradale are wrong
Borradale wrote: Contract Law is the game that franchise scams hide behind and if the Law allows it then the Law and/or the processes to achieve justice are deficient.
For a while longer, US citizens have a constitutional right to penny-pinching stupidity and rose-colored glasses.
While I do agree that there are some deficiencies (in relationship legislation in particular), I disagree with Borradale's statement to the extent that it raises the moral hazard dilemma. In the US right now, we are generously rewarding the most collosal failures with billions of dollars. About the only punishment is that Citibank has to make due with 4-year old private jets instead of getting new ones.
I don't think this would be a good model for franchise regulation, or for any other regulation for that matter. There is a balance here. Just because people fall for pie-in-the-sky franchise sales pitches does not mean that the government should become their nanny. There is room for regulation to prevent overreaching, particularly in some areas such as ADR, "renewal", and punitive enforcement of system standards.
By Obama II, socialism will cover us all like a nice wool blanket. In the meantime let's use a more precise tool than a sledgehammer when regulating economic activity.
Paul SteinbergFranchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
- Log in to post comments
It's not the Law that Disguises Predation...
...but those that profit from that arrangement.
But everyone's got to make a living, don't they Paul?
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
So the answer is
education!
In your face - out there - accessible information.
- Log in to post comments
Accurate Risk Assessment
Ray,
Yes. People significantly underrepresent the deal-breaker risks in franchising for several reasons.
Communicating these well-defined hazards will create a market for higher quality (less toxic) investment offerings and for accurate (if unsettling to the status quo) industry feedback mechanisms.
Oddly enough, democratizing information has its enemies, both directly and on a serial sub-contracting basis.
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
Too evident
Les, yes!
I am feed up with the imbalance of rubbish pushed out to prospective franchisees that is supposed to educate. You get the repetitious 6 point check list; or the whopping big 10 pointers. And they are all usually played down. They just forgot to tell people that there is a hell of a lot more to be considered.
Rarely do you see anything in print that tells the franchisee if he gets it wrong it isn't just the initial investment that is at risk.
How often do the IFA and FCA etc advice suckers to investigate what happens at end of term. Jack and Jill are making a motza in their franchise so we'll just put you out in the boon-docks and you too will make a killing.
The disclosure document is sold as the be-all and end-all to risk assessment. And morons buy it.
But those that publish far less than half the story keep getting published and the reality gets a polish.
I agree with Fuwa in principle and appreciate his very pleasant delivery but I believe better regulation is critical - at least in this country. But it ain't everything so I'm throwing out my stilettos and my wonderbra.
- Log in to post comments
Good news for Victoria Secret
Ray,
Yeesh, mate, so much for lunch. Best to everyone with a brush with fire.
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
Due diligence rubbish
Agree with you Ray.
Those checklists merely serve to make you feel you have been diligent when you haven't even scratched the surface.
Better regulation is critical in Australia.
I paid a lawyer a substantial sum of money to look at my DD and FA and he did not find anything wrong with it. Same with an accountant and a business advisor.
Years later I get another QC to look at it and he tells me it is in breach of the code and trade practices act on no less than 10 instances and in quite serious ways. He agrees I have been lied to, mislead, deceived and conned. He wants more than I have had in assets and income in my entire life to fight this in court.
Clear evidence of illegal activity exists yet unless I can come up with a vast sum there is nothing I can do about it?
This is what franchising is reduced to in this country. Criminal activity that goes un published and un challenged because the victims haven't a hope of achieving anything against big franchisors.
Then there's the good old "talk to existing and ex franchisees" line.
Some FA's have proviosions for terminating you if you "bring any negative opinion upon the franchisor" or if you "speak to any person who is not part of the franchise and is not your paid counsel about any area of the franchise without first obtaining prior written permission from the franchisor"
So how am I supposed to warn potential suckers to stay the hell away?
I told a potential buyer of my concerns for the franchise and was threatened with a nasty legal letter for doing so!!!!
How can i warn others of the impending doom when i am gagged like this?
- Log in to post comments
If Killer DD could prevent Opportunism, the Value is there
Richard,
As one U.S. lawyer among hundreds of thousands, your efforts are commendable.
However, in the vast, vast majority of evaluations of franchises (since you have not been cloned), the pushing the idea that pre-sale vetting can solve even a tiny part of the problem, is bordering on religious ideology.
Until post-sale opportunism is solved, trumpeting Killer DD is just not just raising false hope but worse: offering up a known impotent solution increases systemic investing risk by underepresenting the risks of losing it all once you sign.
- Sorry: It's not enough to say "Well the DD operation was a success but the patient died in post-op." Not for most of us, anyway.
Suggesting pre-sale work will prevent even a slight majority of problems, post-sale, is a huge disservice to most potential franchisees. The abuse will just become more disguised or shift, even if Killer DD were to cover 100% of DD.
However, continue to feel free to denigrate the intelligence and work ethic of franchisees, though.
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
Is there a market for Killer DD?
Most franchise offerings I have seen can and should be rejected out of hand after a quick review and interview with the client, the total time invested amounting to two or three hours usually. People who "get it" don't need Killer DD because they already see why they won't buy the franchise. In my experience, people who are determined to buy in the face of obvious warnings and good advice won't seek Killer DD because they aren't interested in having a lawyer cast doubt on their dreams.
- Log in to post comments
Reversing Onus on Franchise Investment
Howard,
I agree that the investment decision should default to no, unless there are some concrete, compelling reason to say yes.
I also agree with a few legal practitioners that the onus should be reversed in Court ie. the franchisor is obliged to prove his good faith not vis-a-versa.
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
re: Reversing Onus on Franchise Investment
My take: Although a franchisee who does not undertake due diligence is naive or a fool, it has long been the law that a purchaser is entitled to take a statement of a seller at face value, assuming the buyer has no reason to know it is misleading or untrue. I have grown increasingly impatient with judges who seemingly try to turn the franchise regulations on their head in order to impose a legal duty to perform due diligence on the franchisee. It is also ridiculous for franchisors to be able to hide behind "representations" they have written for their franchisees to sign, particularly when they know or their representatives in the field know the representations are untrue. Contract law on the franchisor side seems to be used to yank back what has been promised rather than to memorialize understandings.
In court, I believe a franchisee is entitled to have been naive, even though I don't recommend it.
Is this responsive at all Les?
- Log in to post comments
The Law can only be Bent so far
Howard,
I agree and empathize very much with the pressure that economics has had on the justice system in the last 20 years.
I understand the fiction of a fair fight helps on the selling side. Personally, I think a quick scissors-paper-rock would serve society better, but that's just me.
After some time, this asinine worship in the Church of the Holy B.S. Contract Term is demeaning to everyone involved and cheapens the Rule of Law to it's owners.
Which are the people, right?
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
Re: Is there a market for Killer DD?
Howard is right. I have vetted dozens of offering for people, they fall through fast. The biggest obstacles is getting people to understand what they are trying to achieve, what it will take to take achieve their goals, and setting metrics around those goals. Between the human analysis and goal setting and potentially a cursory examination of the concepts most people's needs can be served in a matter of hours.
Beyond this is the due diligence frontier, I suspect very few who actually even consider franchising ever need to explore this frontier.
FuwaFuwaUsagi
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers."
- Log in to post comments
Where's the Beef in Franchising today?
I agree with Fuwa & Howard:
- They blow up good.
- Real good.
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
I heard a zee signed because someone told them
not to listen to lawyers because they are negative. Their lawyer told them not to do it. I wish I had that lawyer. They are in the "Let's Be Positive," fitness business where zee's blood is spread all over the country. I wish I had their lawyer. If my lawyer told me an absolute no, I would listen.
I believe there is a difference between reality and being negative. I love the saying be gentle as a dove but skrewed as a serpent.
- Log in to post comments
Les - what makes you think that I don't vet the post execution
issues as part of due diligence. I'm not a one trick pony, but, like you, if I didn't have a strong belief system I wouldn't see a purpose to all my ranting and raving about franchising risks.
You might think of some of the things you and I have in common. Would you be in here for this long just bercause you're pissed off?
Michael correctly pointed out in here a long time ago that expectations of substantial revenue for pricier killer pre investment due diligence are not realistic. There has to be an educational campaign that is carried out without expectation of immediate reward if any long term good is to come of any of this.
I don't have an SJ following my name, but I do understand the meaning of sacrificial commitment. Speaking of which, Mike Webster is on to a new approach about all of this that ought to make its debut soon. I won't steal his thunder by making any announcements, but stay tuned, my friend. Paul Steinberg and I are definitely going to support Mike in this effort, even though we are all certain that it is unlikely to pay for even one evening of dinner and wine.
--
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
- Log in to post comments
Monsignori Richard & Paul?
I look forward to Michael's contributions. He never fails to surprise.
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
Initial Research Starting Point
Openfran.org is a new/free option to obtain initial research information from disclosure documents without the need to directly contact the franchisor or attend a discovery day.
Locating and utilizing an experienced due diligence professional is key to making the correct decision.
Susan MaiznerExecutive Director, The Open Franchise Foundation
"Are you part of the OpenFran Revolution?"
p: 480-264-0050e: info@openfran.orgw: http://www.openfran.org
- Log in to post comments
Those people are not franchise attorneys in the sense that
they are competent to assist franchise investors in pre investment due dilligence.
Almost all of them are just fillers out of forms; cut and paste contracts copiers.
Almmost none of them are litigators. Almost non of them ever has experienced having to wrestle with any real franchise issue. They are an army of clerks.
--
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
- Log in to post comments
There is no excuse for franchise investors being ripped off -
none whatsoever.
Hopefully this web site will help to educate the franchise investing public to the need for real expertise in sorting out investment options.
The staggering investment losses are disgusting and unnecessary!
--
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
- Log in to post comments
Richard, BMM has been very valuble
to those who are in the franchising world. I wish I discovered BMM before we went into businesss.
It has been my teacher for over a year now. Lawyers like you are valuble. (Michael, Paul and Howard.) I am sure BMM has helped many people. Hopefully people interested in franchising will discover BMM and seek advice from you.
- Log in to post comments
Franchises, Small Business & lawyers
Richard is absolutely correct. Don't disparage the messenger. I'm a business transactions lawyer who has done a lot of commercial lending and finance work. I can tell you that many franchisees and small business owners nickel and dime themselves into bankruptcy. They listen to franchisors, lending officers, SBA Brokers, SBA BDOs, friends and others when conducting their due diligence. Most often, they are advised to take the cheap route and avoid legal fees at all costs. That advice is most often to the franchisee and small business owner's detriment. The other problem is that some franchisees/Small Bus Owners fail to do any due diligence on their lawyer to see if he/she has the requisite experience to handle franchisee/small business due diligence issues. Believe me, there is usually a lot of folks who stand to make money from the franchisee's decision who don't want a close examination of the deal.
- Log in to post comments
HIRE A LAWYER
if you're planning to invest money in any franchise. Your lawyer works for you and he/she will give you the knowledge you need to make the right decision and will tell you EXACTLY what your obligations are based on the contract. I'm not a lawyer, just someone who decided to take the "cheap" way out because the explanations all sounded fair and reasonable.
I learned my lesson during the period leading up to the decision to close - when I realized they all had me by the short hairs. Each of those now creditors wanted me to take the cheap way out and "work with them". Instead I hired a good lawyer who used his knowledge of the law and our system to save me from hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and allowed me to make a fresh start.
- Log in to post comments
re In an Internet search, the luminaries tend to show up on the
the only illumination is in the formulation of the search engine's equation for the listing, Mr. Solomon. you don't know what you're talking about in the least - no surprise there.
don';t you find tireless self promotion on this site to be ultimately a little childish and embarrassing
- Log in to post comments
The real answer to your question is that we JDs really
have devised the perfect cure for franchise investors/FranWads. It is killer due diligence.
It's not our fault that FranWads won't pay a few thou for that, and would rather risk everything they have in the world on some cheap bozo nonsense hoax due diligence called - have a lawer read the FDD.
For a few thou they can avoid the bad risk investments and not go bankrupt. But we aint their baby sitters. If they want to shoot craps with everything they have in the world they have the perfect right to do so.
All these folks in here who got robbed didn't have to be in the fix they are in. BUT THINK OF THE LEGAL FEES THEY SAVED!
--
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
- Log in to post comments
Re: The real answer to your question is that we JDs really
But, on the other hand, it is those FRANwads who have made franchising so durable in our economy and who provide so much work for you JD's.
I'm sure that most attorneys, NOT Richard or Paul or Michael, of course, are thankful that the FRANwads have NOT invested in due diligence because -- think of all the LEGAL FEES that would be missed by the JD's if the 685,000 franchise attorneys listed in a GOOGLE search were deprived of "business" because franchising activitty was inhibited because of increasing good due diligence with experts like our "no BS" and honest Richard Solomon of Franchise Remedies.
- Log in to post comments
Re: Re:The real answer to your question is that we JDs really
Actually, if you use the ABA's Franchise Forum as a benchmark, there are more like 2,000+ framchise attorneys, but there might be work for less than 20% of them in any form of FT accounting. None the less, you're right, it is still a heard chasing a small flock of major events.
- Log in to post comments
Franchisee and franchise attorney market equilibrium
Using your numbers, the math suggests the contrary - that there may be a nice equilibrium of attorneys and franchise buyers.
Here's why. If there are 650,000 franchisees, then assuming about 10% turnover a year, that's 65,000 franchisees buying in the year. For the 2,000 franchise attorneys, there are 32.5 franchisees per year or about 3 franchisees per month for each franchise attorney.
Using your math of 20% of franchises who need some sort of legal help, that means 6 franchisee clients per month.
That's assuming ALL franchise attorneys offer the service of helping buyers and franchisees - even Nixon Peabody and DLA Piper.
- Log in to post comments
Franchise attorneys hard to find
Where do franchise buyers find comprehensive lists of these 2,000 franchise attorneys?
I don't see where the ABA site offers that specialty to search by. Business lawyer seems to be the closest thing.
- Log in to post comments
Never mind the ABA. Go on any search egine and use the
search words franchise lawyer.
--
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
- Log in to post comments
re Never mind the ABA. Go on any search egine and use the
Went there (Googled franchise lawyer) as you suggested Mr. Solomon and found that there were around 321,000 pages to look at. Just because there are thousands of pages there;s no connection with the number of lawyers found among them.
You show up on a page of those listings, but is that because Google has researched your work or ability or because your site got you there? The only thing said before is that the ABA has 2,000+ attorneys in the franchise forum and I doubt they are all 'clerks' as you put it.
- Log in to post comments
In an Internet search, the luminaries tend to show up on the
first few pages. The thousands of others are irrelevant to what a franchise investor is looking for.
You call them and ask (1) do you focus on pre investment franchise due diligence; and (2) do you vet the business issues as well as the legal issues? You only hire one who answers YES to BOTH those questions.
--
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
- Log in to post comments
re In an Internet search, the luminaries tend to show up on the
This comment has been moved here.
- Log in to post comments
Attorney Research Ideas
Juan -
Here's a few ideas if you want to save some time and filter the attorney search down to a certain type of franchise opp or franchise offering:
For franchisee side attorneys - go to "www.OpenFran.org" and type in the franchise name or type of franchise, along with the word "litigation" or similar keywords.
Locate and download the registration doc from the list (or filter even more if needed). Then find the litigation disclosure section inside the PDF (Usually Item 3). Copy the name of the entity involved in the suit and then search Google/Yahoo/MSN, etc. for the specific case to find the attorney.
You can also find the section of former franchisees and their contact information inside most disclosure Docs. Contact information for the franchisee listed in the litigation section will sometimes be found in the terminated franchise listing later in the Doc (Usually Item 20). Call around to see who may have retained counsel...but not everyone will talk with you directly.
For franchisor side attorneys - you can search pretty much any franchisor on OpenFran.org and see who the representative attorney is since the transmission cover letter, filing forms, etc. are filled out by the franchisor's attorney. Type in the franchisor name or the type of franchise in the search and then open a "Notice Filing Form" to see the attorneys who represent the "big boys" that do not have to register.
Another idea is to search for independent franchise associations and check with who their legal counsel is or who they recommend. Many IndFA's will have a legal referral list. As of mid-2008, franchisors are required to disclose the contact information for IndFA's in their network.
Last - if you do not have the time or the inclination to do research/due diligence...there are several folks here on BMM who you can pay to expertly/efficiently do the research for you. Time is money.
If you weren't aware - OpenFran.org's search engine is very powerful and searches down to the keyword in over 300,000 franchise documents. OpenFran is also accepting publicly available franchising lawsuit filings and orders for the archive. Using OpenFran for your research will save you tons of time and money when conducting due diligence and other research.
BTW - OpenFran.org is now out of Beta - users can search and download free PDF's to their heart's content without needing an account. Although, registering for a free account is still suggested as you will be kept up-to-date on OpenFran developments and invited to access future power features before public release...as is donating as little as a $1 through PayPal whenever you do find OpenFran helpful.
Happy hunting.
Susan MaiznerExecutive Director, The Open Franchise Foundation
"Are you part of the OpenFran Revolution?"
p: 480-264-0050e: info@openfran.orgw: http://www.openfran.org
- Log in to post comments
re OpenFran
Fine site, but I've yet to find Mr. Solomon listed anywhere there.
- Log in to post comments
re: Franchisee and franchise attorney market equilibrium
Please understand that "FT" in the original comment means 'full time'.
Just because a ton of franchisees exist, there is not necessarily a ton of franchise work being done.
Now, please show me a lawyer, or any other type of office worker, who can do well on your '6' clients per month.
Your numbers don't work.
- Log in to post comments
Those people are not franchise attorneys in the sense that
This comment has been moved here.
- Log in to post comments
Litigation versus Prevention
Guest writes: "But, on the other hand, it is those FRANwads who have made franchising so durable in our economy and who provide so much work for you JD's."
Richard will tell you the same thing as I will: we would much rather see people in our office before they buy and not after.
Michael Webster, a franchisee attorney in Toronto, Ontario, publishes a website on business opportunities and franchises called "The BizOp News"
- Log in to post comments
It was written: Do we
It was written:
Do we reconcile these disasters with broad statements of ‘buyer beware'?
and
Contract Law is the game that franchise scams hide behind and if the Law allows it then the Law and/or the processes to achieve justice are deficient.
My reply:
Yes we do reconcile it with buyer beware - period. The law cannot provide justice, it never has, nor can it protect you. All the law can do it attempt to rectify problems after they occur, and you will never be made whole in terms of time, energy, and emotional damage. Ask anyone who has lost a family member, ask anyone who has lost their life's fortune if they felt justice was served by whatever sentence or punitive assessment was imposed on their transgressor.
If you want justice, you can hire it out in any major city for a nominal fee. If people bring hurt to you and your family justice dictates you bring equal anguish to them and theirs. Court rooms and law does not do that, so throw the fantasy of justice out the window. Once you get over that childish notion you are left with the function of law, which is simply the rules we abide by.
When you get beyond the idea that the law is there to protect you and administer justice you can enter the world of adults.
When you leave your home, assume you will be physically assaulted. If it occurs it will not be in the presence of a law enforcement official; so be prepared. When you are in your home you should assume that someone will forcefully enter it intending harm to your family, you should be prepared. You should assume that every one entering your domain means you and yours harm.
In every business dealing, assume the man across from you is out to get whatever he can, by whatever means he can - period.
Assume your Representative in Congress is looking out for his own interest, and you will seldom be disappointed. Assume you priest/pastor/minister/guru is a sinner, you will seldom be disappointed.
Now you might think that is a cynical view but be prepared to be delighted. When you are prepared you will constantly be pleasantly surprised and delighted with all the warm hearted, honest, open, caring individuals you meet every single day. You will delight when you do business on a handshake and it works out the way it was suppose to. However if not, you know you did business on a hand shake because you knew the person's background, you know his vices, you know where he goes, who he associates with, his strengths, his weaknesses, and the reason you don't need but a handshake is you are convinced you can force him to comply with the agreed to terms utilizing that knowledge.
You do not need Government trying to protect you - they cannot. Get over the silly notion they can. You don't need them either. Stand on your own, be strong, and every single thing you do assess the risk it brings to your family; mitigate risks to your family - be a man.
And if you are a woman, find a man and free him to act with one without feminizing him with this liberal feminist B.S. , as a woman and if you can't figure out how to properly incentive a man to act like a man you are already beyond help.
Cripes folks, it is not that hard.
FuwaFuwaUsagi
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers."
- Log in to post comments
A cogent argument for Infanticide
Fuwa,
I admit failing to exercise my maximizing utility laissez-faire imperative in not strangling my children as they slept. Or providing for them financially.
Still lots of time, though to teach them to trust or to have their altruism lobotomy.
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
Exemption granted
Les, you are a Canadian, therefore you are exempted from my commentary. My comments are directed at U.S. citizens only. I am an ignorant American, I am not aware of the laws of other lands or social convention there of.
FuwaFuwaUsagi
- Log in to post comments
the United States of Australia?
Fuwa,
My mistake. Didn't catch that your talk to Ray was a private conversation, though.
Wrapping yourself in a flag? Reminds me of Samuel Johnson's scoundrel quote. Please, whatever you do, don't drop your "stupid, in large number" handle. It shuts down debate by trying to invoke shame so well.
Exemption? Thanks, but no.
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
Re: the United States of Australia?
Les, what you do not grasp is I find little merit in debate when I am so very correct in what I state. You can tell when I have doubt, I phrase it as a question, otherwise just study the fonts of wisdom and abide by them and you will find your lot in life so very much improved, women will find you more appealing, there will be a spring in your walk, and your dancing will improve.
At some point in life you become a man and you stand your ground, fight your own battles, and seek counsel from those wiser than you.
This fascination societies have with retarding maturation to hide unemployment is compelled by the law on unintended consequences in the form of making the general populace a bunch of sheep.
FuwaFuwaUsagi
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers."
- Log in to post comments
Thanks for the postscript consistency
Fuwa,
As for the rest of the boilerplate RandRant, I agree fully.
Les Stewart MBA
FranchiseFool: Understanding Franchising
- Log in to post comments
How to alienate the entire female readership of BMM: STEP 1
Fuwa writes: "And if you are a woman, find a man and free him to act with one without feminizing him with this liberal feminist B.S. , as a woman and if you can't figure out how to properly incentive a man to act like a man you are already beyond help."
This comment is disgusting, derogratory and discriminatory. If this was intended to be sarcastic it failed.
The notions you imply with this comment indicate to me you are living in the dark ages and completely and utterly removes any respect I might have had for your other opinions.
So the answer to my franchising woes as a female franchisee is to "incentive a man" to do it for me. Brilliant. sounds way cheaper than a lawyer. Don't know why I didn't think of it myself- must be because I am a woman beyond help.
I will stop trawling the legal and franchising sites for info and turn my attention instead to the dating sites. Got any hints for performing due diligence for prospective men folk?
"Never underestimate the power of stupid comments from large egos"
- Log in to post comments
Here's a hint
Don't let a chauvinist pig cause you to come unglued. If you wouldn't bark back at a dog in the street, you shouldn't respond to ridiculous statements of people who have no sensitivity regarding eqalitarian realities.
--
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
- Log in to post comments
- Log in to post comments
Sorry, but I disagree. There is even less room for excuses
when the very thinly capitalized buy cheaper franchises without availing themselves of competent pre investment due diligence.
The reasons for this include that franchise opportunities addressed to the thinly capitalized are more likely to be scams than those addressed to the well heeled.
Being less than wealthy is not a reason respectable in law or logic for being negligent with risks assumption.
If a marginal franchise investor can avoid a scam for just a few thousand dollars, and in so doing also become more knowledgeable regarding how to do it without a franchise (as most of the lower initial cost franchises are more easily done with a little self help and nothing more - think, for example something like Party Pump Up, 1-800-Got Junk, and any dog poop cleaning deal or yard maintenance deal), then he gets even more bang for his buck in the competent due diligence approach.
There is no case to be made for low cap franchisees not being pushed into spending the money for good killer due diligence. I have shown dozens of low cap candidates how to do the same business they were looking at without having to buy a franchise. Just about all of them are still in business and enjoying much more success than they ever could have by buying the deal they walked in with.
--
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