Comments and Forum Discussion Problems

Discussion of problems or suggestions about comment and forum issues, such as guidelines.

One such problem is that guests and members often will sidetrack comments under articles. There sometimes is confusion on when to begin discussions in forums and when to place it in comment areas.

Use Comment Viewing Options Bar

It sounds like you do not like viewing comments that are flat expanded.

Once you are logged in, make sure you personalize the way you look at comments. Below every article and before the comments is a Comment Viewing Options bar.

You probably will want to have your settings as threaded expanded, with newest comments posted first. That nests in replies and puts the newest comments on the top so you don't have to scroll back several pages on long threads to find the newest posts.

Make sure you click on the save button in the bar to save your preferences.

Mr. Blue MauMau

on April 27th, 2008

Tutorial for Comments

1.  The preview doesn't show where your comment will pop up.

2.  Tutorials with small videos might help.

3.  You really need to be able to turn some commentators off in a certain thread. 

Michael Webster PhD LLBFranchise News

Posted by michael webster on April 27th, 2008

Rare Case of Internet Libel: Challenging a Woman's Chastity

Of all the comments, tirades and dissing of individuals and companies on Craig's List lively discussions, it was an archaic state law that takes umbrage at a woman's chastity being challenged. A poster on Craigslist is in serious trouble becaus he made adulterous accusations about his former lover and her attorney. He's been charged with two counts of criminal libel.

"It's not a charge you see a lot of," Larimer County District Attorney Larry Abrahamson said of the 1800s-era state law that can put people in jail for the content of their speech or writing. Abrahamson charged J.P. Weichel, 40, of Loveland, in October over posts he allegedly made on Craigslist's "Rants and Rave" section. - via Yahoo

Moral of the story is don't challenge the chastity of a woman on the Net. In some states, you tread on risky grounds for libel.

on December 2nd, 2008

What's the point??

Paul (since you mentioned Granville and myself in a previous post), you've probably noticed that I don't post on here as much as I used to, the reason is that there really isn't much point in posting on a certain topic, because typically it deviates into something else.  I don't want to read all of the off-topic bs.  I had actually meant to post something last night on this subject, but didn't get around to it, so I thought I would write something today.  Then when I look at the site this morning, there is talk about website statistics, and Palin/Brown.  I'm not sure what either of those have to do with buying a resale.  

I was reading another post today about the smoothie industry and as I was reading it, I noticed that Jim Amos was quoted in it.  Odds are that blog will be bombarded with 'Amos is a devil' rhetoric when it has nothing to do with the topic.  

So, the real question that should be asked is, what can BMM do to make this website better for the pro-franchisor side to communicate?  Maybe it's moderating the website a little more/better.  I know Michael has mentioned previously giving the author of a blog the right to moderate or maybe only letting people with member names post.  That could be a start.

But for now, I don't comment often and neither will others because there is little value to when your comments are buried with other non-related posts.

on August 30th, 2010

BMM has a comment moderation function

I know Michael has mentioned previously giving the author of a blog the right to moderate or maybe only letting people with member names post.  That could be a start.

The author of an article and a blog has the ability to moderate comments by turning all of them on, off, or freezing comments so no new post can be published. At considerable cost to Blue MauMau, this function was programmed at the suggestion of Mr. Dale Nabors, the then president of FranSynergy. He later became the CEO of Cuppy's Coffee. There was considerable online debate over this function. Almost no columnist in four years has used this moderation function.

But the function is still there below the message field. (Comment posters and guests cannot see it.)

BTW, this particular comment thread is now officially off the topic of the article on the benefits of buying an existing franchise. There is aready a public forum for suggestions to BMM on new social media functions / tools that would be more appropriate.

on August 30th, 2010

Draw a line down the middle

On one side have pro and on the other side have anti and lose all debate. This thread may have gone from ‘buying an existing franchise’ to ‘do you want to sell franchises in the future’. If an original topic is worthwhile the commentators return. For once the move came via the lawyers. Hehehe

One comment from downunder and look what happened. Debate and great entertainment where most are likely to take away something. Thank you Mr BMM. We don’t envy or want your job.

Posted by Fried on August 30th, 2010

But Paul

BMM is the bastion of the anti-franchising crowd and the best place to ride a hobbyhorse.

on August 29th, 2010

BMM has a lot of influence, whether that is a good thing or not

Guest wrote:

But Paul

BMM is the bastion of the anti-franchising crowd and the best place to ride a hobbyhorse.

There is truth to that observation. Unfortunately I would say that I would agree with that observation more than I would disagree with it.

And that is not the fault of those who participate on BMM.

It is the fault of those who do not participate.

Don has provided an excellent platform for debate. It is one which is now the most widely-read franchise discussion board in the world. It is one which is read by regulators, attorneys, media professionals, and academics worldwide.

In fact, BMM is ranked more highly in Bangladesh (#5,084) and Philippines (#6,616) than in the United States (#17,600).

By comparison, the International Franchise Assn site ranks 26,298 in the United States, and #53,145 in the Philippines.

Worldwide rankings for some key franchise websites:

  • BlueMauMau ....                63,079
  • IFA website ...                     97,625
  • FranchiseKingBlog ....     160,671
  • UnhappyFranchisee ....   766,122
  • FCA website ....             1,251,848

Um... has anyone wondered why so many folks in Bangladesh, India, and the Philippines are going on BlueMauMau??

For the clueless franchisors, I will tell you since I live in New York and have franchisee clients: those foreign readers are the ones sending money to their relatives in the United States---the ones who are buying your franchises.

On a regular basis, Don gets inquiries from reporters both in the US and abroad. He does his best to explain that there is a debate, but Don is not much helped by those on the franchisor side of the equation.

Don also gets a steady stream of emails from franchise industry professionals and members of the franchise bar, complaining that BMM is biased.


when Don invites them to write an article on BMM, they decline.

Well, boo hoo. I'll send you a box of Kleenex.

I am amazed that pit-bull, take-no-prisoners litigators in the franchise bar are terrified of the likes of Borradale and Jorgensen.

Members of the franchise bar and franchisor executives who have no hesitation about going on CNBC or testifying on the Hill are all of a sudden turned into whimpering jellyfish by the prospect of ex-franchisee Grandma Barbara Jorgensen taking issue with them!

About the only folks who are willing to put forth a reasoned argument for the other side are "Granville Bean" and "JD"--just look at Stephen Giles' recent email rant and compare that to Alex Moriarty.

The difference between Giles and Moriarty?


Giles is a franchise attorney--an area of law which has not had to rely on anything other than lopsided contract jurisprudence and financially-impared opponents. Contrast that with much of the rest of the bar (folks like Moriarty) who must actually use their brain, use persuasive reasoning, and deal with opposition that won't roll over.

BMM is indeed a place where there is insufficient intellectual rigor and insufficient presentation of opposing views. The 2 are related on BMM, just as within the franchise industry and franchise bar.

Grow up and grow a set.

The genie is out of the bottle, and if BMM is any indication, the days of franchisors being able to skate by (in the court of public opinion and in the courts of law) are over.

Like it or not, the continuing reluctance of the franchise industry to come to grips with the new media age is going to lead to an increasing imbalance in discourse...

...and that imbalance can have legislative and judicial consequences.

on August 30th, 2010

Grandma Jorgensen?

You crack me up Paul.  The truth is the truth is the truth. 

I say bring it on!!!!!  Right Ray?  

on August 30th, 2010

Mormor Jorgensen

Mormor Jorgensen arrives at the Hill and Congress quickly abdicates to the higher power. All bad peoples atone and goodness prevails.

Posted by Guest on August 30th, 2010

Jorgensen lives in different world, but so do we all on occasion

Guest writes:

Jorgensen arrives at the Hill and Congress quickly abdicates to the higher power. All bad peoples atone and goodness prevails.

I personally like Barbara, but her emotionally-based arguments drive me up the wall.

However, my point was not that she is lobbying on the Hill, let alone that she would be effective there.

My point was that franchsor industry attorneys and executives won't engage in dialogue on the leading website because they are afraid of people like her.

That is foolish, because there is evidence that BMM has influenced the debate and has led to stories in the broad media.

For the franchise industry to ignore the internet and social media today is as dangerous as it would have been for the franchise industry to ignore the NY Times or Wall St Journal back in ancient times.

Disintermediation is something which we have seen washing over industry after industry. It started with financial disintermediation back in the 1970s (remember money market funds, etc) and now we are in the age of information disintermediation.

We can bemoan the vanishing Learned Intermediary (and believe me, sometimes when I read Barbara's postings, I do, LoL) but one definition of maturity is to deal with the world as it is, not as we would like it to be.

As an analogy:

Twenty Five percent of Americans believe that Barack Obama is Muslim and about that percentage believe that he was not born in Hawaii despite evidence to the contrary. The White House has to deal with those perceptions (erroneous as they may be) because those perceptions impact their ability to function.

You may not agree with Jorgensen. You may think that she is factually off-base every time she utters a syllable.

But the solution is not to ignore her, and in a bigger picture sense the solution is not to ignore BMM and other websites which will affect the public debate and the public perception of your industry.

on August 30th, 2010

Barbara is BMM

Ignore Barbara? All her posts should come with a warning that say 'This is what happens when you get taken by a rogue franchisor'.

She is the reason for BMM, and the poster child of the franwad.

PS - Obama isn't a muslim? Where's the evidence to the contrary?

Posted by Guest on August 30th, 2010

Guest I would not go that far.

If I am the poster child of the Franwad, then so be it.  Nothing would make me happier than to see less or nobody hurt in franchising.

It is my belief the lawyers here are BMM.  They enlighten us. 

I know emotional writers drive lawyers crazy.  I am not ashamed to be an emotional writer.  That is how I write.  However it does get emotional when your experiences hurt your family.  Without any emotion there would not be any convictions of right and wrong.  My feelings run deep. Anyone who doesn't have feelings don't have convictions.  I like who I am and hope everyone, (including the lawyers, succeed.) 

It is my opinion the lawyers make this site what it is.  I like to think I represent the people.  I am a people person and wish no ill on anyone. 


on August 30th, 2010

In defence of Mr Giles

In defence of Mr Giles I have to point out that he is often noted by the FCA, industry media and the ACCC, to be Australia’s numero uno franchising legal xspurt. And as I have pointed out more than once, he is so bloody good he never gets to Court.

There are some very fine lawyers in Australia but Mr Giles is more of an administrator and occasional writer of spin.

Barb, the truth is the truth doesn’t seem to be setting that many free.

Posted by Ray Borradale on August 30th, 2010

Hopefully the truth will change things.

It may take baby steps to get there.  The more who blog their realities in franchising the better.  Grandville seems to be successful.  I am happy for him.  It is those that are taken that I am concerned about.  People who have always did things right, then a rogue zor comes along and fleeces them.  When something is broken, we must fix it.

on August 30th, 2010

Barbara jorgensen You are being manipulated

Full of ego and denial and a marionette.

Posted by Tom G. on January 18th, 2011

Actually, if one were to re-read

my comment then one might conclude that there was in fact very little howitzer content as opposed to what expanded on some points that needed to be expanded on. I doubt anyone would disagree that the prospective franchisee is rarely given more than 80%, at best, of the information they should consider.

And how can they be given all of what should be considered when franchise due diligence is quite complex and varies from brand to brand, location to location, prospect to prospect ... contract to contract etc. That is why we recommend that potential investors get expert help. And besides I like to prompt people to blogs that grab my attention and see if others want to debate.

I don't think I suggested that blog was guilty of deliberatley ommitting considerations. When I do think such a thing I'm not usually shy and saying so. And I won't suggest I didn't add a little bit of my 'are bloody nuts' but hey, we are talking aren't we. Now anyone that wants to get back on topic can go hard.

Paul, I want to thank you for these comments and those you have made particularly over the last week. No catch ... you are an education.

Posted by Ray Borradale on August 30th, 2010

Numbers from Alexa

Paul, the Alexa numbers probably make the most sense for the designated audience.  So for example, while the Australian FCA site has low international traffic, it is the 36,000 most popular site in Australia.  

BMM's US numbers are  good, 17,000 compared to the IFA's 27,000.  There is of course no social scene at the IFA site worth talking about.

(Our own website,, is now at 194,000 for US traffic, which is great growth for the last 6 months.)

But you would really like to be under 5,000.  A number of the small business aggregator news sites are under 1,000. Moving to this level is hard, and has nothing to do with the fact that some people won't right because there are commentators on the site they don't like.

Posted by michael webster on August 30th, 2010

Influential site must be dealt with even if disagreed with

Re the Alexa numbers of aggregators

Isn't this a bit of apples-to-oranges comparison when websites do this?

As I recall-- a while back one of the franchise chat sites jumped sharply in the rankings, and it turned out that the ranking number related to the aggregator site, but there was no way of breaking out the readership for the franchise section of the website.

But my main point was (and remains) that whether anyone likes BMM or not is irrelevant. What matters is that if BMM is the most influential website in a particular field, then it behooves the industry pr mavens and industry legal counsel to participate in the discussion.

on August 30th, 2010

If that were to happen

Paul, I promise you I will mostly shut up.

Hope that helps ....

Posted by Ray Borradale on August 30th, 2010

Solution is more speech, not less

Ah, Ray...

funny, but in all seriousness the solution to the problem of bias on BMM is for those who disagree with the present comment bias to come in and balance the ship.

Don has spent years responding to irate franchisor industry emails by explaining the realities of operating in a changed public square. But franchisors for the most part cling to a hope that this "internet thingy" is a passing fad.

It ain't.

on August 30th, 2010

I wasn’t going to say a word

but the other day you mentioned that people outside the US didn’t really grasp what the First Amendment right to Free Speech meant to Americans. Or something like that …

I’ll just say that many believe that behind Free Speech is accountability in design to have all people accountable in a better society. Accountability is a huge thing and we can see it but we haven’t touched it.

However; people tend to live with what they got when government tells them it’s good for them and free speech is a bit noisy anyway.

With the internet that potential accountability for how we all individually behave and the decisions we make takes on massive new dimensions as it continues to grow as if it’s on steroids. And that growth is undeniably aligned with internet usage and reliance.

Good franchising has an opportunity to shine amongst the sh … rubbish that just won’t shine.  The problem for anyone contemplating good franchising is that you have to be seen to be transparent therefore you have to stand up and be noticed.  That day may not be here but it’s coming.  Franchisors will one day participate at BMM even if it’s when Don’s great grandson is the boss.

Have you noticed that people in the industry mostly don’t participate in the direction of those who would run the industry?

Posted by Ray Borradale on August 30th, 2010

Re: Its a howitzer sort of

The best way to avoid risk is not to take any which for many people it is the correct course.

What most failed or failing franchisees have in common is they were unrealistic about the risks associated with opening a business and did little to no pre-purchase research/due diligence. They could have avoided crappy franchise concepts, but they would still have risk of a total and complete loss.

on August 29th, 2010

Perhaps, but why engage when you don't have to?

While it is certainly unwise to ignore highly trafficed websites just ebcause they post rants against your point of view, one must consider whether engagement lends credit to the most irresponsible of the ranters. This is the old "Don't get down into the mud to wrestle with a pig" argument.

A recent example was Sarah Palin taking on US Senator Scott Brown. She made an illogical claim that voters in Alaska won't support him as their representative (despite him NOT being their representative-they have 2 of their own in the Senate) because BLAH BLAH BLAH PLEASE LOOK AT ME EVERYBODY!!!

Did Brown take the bait? No. He essentially said "Who? Next question."

He's a US Senator. She's ... well...not really anything official. Why give her any status or more publicity? Why validate anything that she said by even arguing with her? If they run against each other in the future, he has a nice piece of video that displays how how she doesn't underrstand how Congress works.

If you are an established franchise, you don't need to argue in an unregulated forum with annonymous ranters. Why would you? Better to put out your statements and it BMM and other sites want to pick it up, great.

Posted by Guest on August 30th, 2010

Your argument is so flawed...

...Sarah Palin is taken pretty in many people showed up at the Beck rally this weekend vs. how many people can Scott Brown rile up?

The analogy you make is weak...because the real question is not 'Sarah who?' it is 'Scott who?'

I know a lot of fleeced franchisees that rant with cause and very few franchisors that have a good reputation. I'll take nuggets from these rants and look for patterns where as I'd pretty much ignore the marketing spins and paid adverts in mags such as entrepeneur that can buy you a spot as a top franchise.

Posted by Guest on August 30th, 2010

Don't credit the chipmunk nipping at your heel

Well, the analogy holds IMHO, to the franchisor-franchisee context and social media, and the ability to sell existing franchises to new prospects.

Franchisors need to get people to invest. Politicians need to get people to vote and to contribute money (not just attend free rallies). Very similar. Going to a Sarah Palin rally costs zero. Buying a burger will cost you, what, $4. Buying a McDonalds costs $4 million (give or take).

Sarah is everywhere saying anything that will get her noticed, but she couldn't land the votes or money to get elected to anything after the small job she quit before she finished it. Scott Brown garnered millions of contributions from the whole country for a state election and changed the political landscape of the most powerful nation on earth. He did it against overwhelming odds. Sarah has done...what?

I am not knocking her; to the contrary. She has made herself into a commodity and has her own platform that people will listen to. For sure, but for free. Just like I buy burgers, but haven't bought a burger franchise (and I voted for McCain). Back to the pont of the article.

What will the net effect of your message be? Who are you speaking to with that message, and most importantly, IS IT THE PEOPLE THAT YOU WANT TO HEAR YOUR MESSAGE TUNING IN?

Talking to a bunch of PO'd, broke former UPS/Mailboxes, etc. store franchisees isn't selling your burger franchises, so why bother until it does? BMM is making strides in this regard. More and more legit sources post here and it is getting more balanced. The trick is to talk to the people with resources that want to buy what you are selling while cutting through the noise of people that want to pull your message into their personal hole in the mud and keep you from doing it. If all you generate when trying to sell your existing franchise locations is responses from people who lost money and have a mission to bring down your franchisor, why generate any of that noise?

Scott Brown doesn't need Sarah Palin, so you don't hear him mention her name. Sarah Palin is the one that needs to trade on a US Senator's publicity, so she does. Why does a standing US Senator need to talk about her? Will she get him votes IN MASSACHUSETTS for the next election to the Senate? Nope. You stay ON MESSAGE. He's not running for Pres, he is runnning for re-election in a statewide election. Voters in Alaska don't matter so he doesn't need to address them. Any MAss residents that attended that D rally are already Brown voters.

Always keep in mind your goal, and how the message does or doesn't serve the goal. It's not just fear that keeps major franchisors from this site. It is distraction and distortion, but that is changing as BMM earns its stripes and real buyers are checking in. That is happening.

(Legal dpeartments at franchisors will always be an impediment, but that won't stop the change in biz climate, just slow it down a bit).

This relates directly to the sale of existing franchises.

Posted by Guest on August 30th, 2010

There was metal in your words

A stand that ignores critics has worked for a long time but it ignores a changing world. A sophisticated entrepreneur might seek a specialist external view of accountability, transparency and volume and how the message and delivery should keep step and evolve. There are many expert opinions on what influence future internet chit chat trends will have on consumers, investors and humanity.

The majority tell you to get with the program or look silly in the slow lane. The balance at BMM should be taken whole. The lawyers and some others bring the best available balance to the table. The issue for investors is risk and on balance chit chat and expert opinion leans to investors becoming informed.

What better place to come than BMM when the true problem with balanced appraisal comes from the mass franchise media droppings. Those who cannot withstand inspection should shrink away until the internet finds them and investors shun them. This relates directly to the sale of existing franchises.

Posted by Fried on August 30th, 2010

Guest Postings

Guest writes: "one must consider whether engagement lends credit to the most irresponsible of the ranters. This is the old "Don't get down into the mud to wrestle with a pig" argument."

Maybe, but many franchisees behind a firewall protected intranet produce similar complaints.  Be best to learn how to deal with this medium instead of adopting a Marie Antoinette pose.

Posted by michael webster on August 30th, 2010

How can people expect to have an open intelligent dialogue

When anonymous smear mongers attack every post. I have posed on fitness threads and Barbara J. attacked me personally. It get's to a person eventually to have to endure these attacks over and over. ANonymous posting by Ray were ruthlessly attacking me, my occupation as a busines broker. It has been horrible. Pretty soon you get dragged in the gutter discussion. I don't blame franchisers for not wanting to come here. It seems all you guys want to do is take down systems. IMO

Posted by Tom Garmon on January 16th, 2011

Michael Webster and BMM should stand up against anon bashing!

"Thanks to facebook I discovered it is Michael Webster's brithday.  Everyone should take the time to wish him a fantastic brithday.  If it weren't for him and the lawyer's on BMM, I know I wouldn't of learned how franchisors take advantage of people.

Thanks Michael. 

I am not very good at bashing people.  I know there are good bashers on BMM.  (The good bashing that makes people laugh.)  Let's have some fun."

Barbara Jorgensen


 Can you blame the franchisers when you attorneys have created this culture here?

Posted by Tom Garmon on January 16th, 2011

No more Guest posts

This would be the single biggest positive step toward a more reasoned forum.

on January 22nd, 2011

I second this!

There is too much riff raft running off intelligent commentary. This site is going downhill fast.

Posted by Guest on January 24th, 2011

I responded to this and we are waiting for

clearance from the BMM censors. Maybe you can see it in a bit.

Posted by RichardSolomon on June 1st, 2012


I responded to this and we are waiting for clearance from the BMM censors

LOL, I gave up posting anything of merit.  Every time I tried to post anything of substance the spam filter would kick in.  

Let's see, there once was a website from Nantucket...with a spam filter that really...


-- Never underestimate the power of stu--- people in large numbers --

on June 2nd, 2012

Webster was in here complaining about the righteousness filter

a few days ago. He and I are often very frustrated that we have said something that some cretin might be offended by, and the posting gets swallowed up.

However, this aint Face Book and Don aint Mark Zuckerberg. If you want true democracy you have to move to Switzerland.

Posted by RichardSolomon on June 2nd, 2012

Commenting Policy

What ticks me off is how Don decides certain comments are off  topic and need to be removed to the ranter's soapbox.  I don't agree with a number of the decisions, but I want a better policy than "Don is Dictator."  I would prefer that the author of the piece have this control.

Posted by michael webster on June 3rd, 2012

The author of the piece will be just as arbitrary as Don, just

in another direction. You would just be substituting one inflexible rule for another.

The question is whether the arbiter of rightness and wrongness is usually reasonable. So far we have bewen fortunate with Don.

I vote we stay with the devil we know.

Posted by RichardSolomon on June 3rd, 2012

Authors Rule

Richard states: "The question is whether the arbiter of rightness and wrongness is usually reasonable. So far we have bewen fortunate with Don.

I vote we stay with the devil we know."

But, that would be fine with me.  I would simply stop paying attention to those authors.

Posted by michael webster on June 3rd, 2012

Why did juicy Brucey pull his little article on self penetration

of IT systems? That one would have been good for laughs for the rest of the week?

Posted by RichardSolomon on July 5th, 2012

I asked Mr. Sniegowski to

I asked Mr. Sniegowski to remove the post that he placed over my name (at his insistence with early morning emails begging for my comments – certainly not initiated by me) because I have real credentials and real knowledge and don’t want to be in any way associated with what has become a chat room for half wits.
We have published more than 20 articles on infosec and penetration testing in our newsletter and other well-known publications as shown below (e.g a white paper published by CCH – almost as reputable as bluemaumau - lol).
I have also authored, among many others, the publications below (cf. Solomon) and have no intention of ever being associated with make-believe over-the-hill morons suffering oral diarrhea or this website ever again because my mother told me that if you associate with morons people might mistake you for one.

Franchise Regulation and Damages, (co-author with Byron E. Fox), Commerce Clearing House, Inc., 2005 (updated 3 times annually).
Finance, Accounting and Tax Aspects of Franchising, Bureau of National Affairs Tax Management Portfolio 559-3rd (2012) 559-2nd (2005) and 559 (1999).
Accounting and Tax Aspects of Franchising (co-author with John L. Allberry), The Little, Brown Tax Practice Series, Little, Brown & Co., 1995
The Franchising Industry (co-author with John L. Allberry), Commerce Clearing House Tax Transactions Library, 1991

Articles, Chapters and White Papers
“Canada’s Tim Hortons Case: Lessons Learned About Franchisors’ Rights, Class Action Certification and Rules of Expert Testimony,” (co-author with Edward (Ned) Levitt), CCH Business Franchise Guide, 2012.
“Current Damages Issues In Franchise Disputes: Lost future Royalties and the Value of a Terminated Franchise,” Dun on Damages, 2012.
“Valuations in Franchising”, (co-author with Ned Levitt), Canadian Franchise Association National Convention, 2012.
“Expert Testimony and the Changes to FRCP Rule 26,” (co-author with Henry Chan), LJN’s Franchising Business & Law Alert, 2010.
“Expert Testimony and the Changes to FRCP Rul3 26,” (co-author with Henry Chan), LJN’s Franchising Business & Law Alert, 2010.
“Make Plans for Tax Hikes – They’re Coming,” Franchising World, 2010.
“Tax Issues – The US Perspective,” International Franchising: A Practitioner’s Guide, Globe Business Publishing Ltd, 2010.
“Cyber Crime and Cyber Security: A White Paper for Franchisors, Licensors, and Others,” (co-author with Henfree Chan, Henry Chan and Susan Ogulnick), Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2009
“Franchise Companies vs. Hackers: 20 Questions on Cyber Crime,” (co-author with Henfree chan), LJN’s Franchising Business & Law Alert, 2009.
“Succession Planning For Franchise Owners,” (co-author with Susan Ogulnick), Wealth Management Business, 2009.
“Challenges to the Admissibility of Expert Financial Testimony: 2005-2008,” (co-author with Susan Ogulnick and Sara Anne Schaeffer), Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2008.
“Why Valuing Franchise Businesses is Different from Valuing Other Businesses,” (co-author with Susan Ogulnick), Business Appraisal Practice, 2008.
“Penetration Testing: Why Franchise Systems Need Information Security,” (co-author with Henfree Chan), Franchising World, 2008.
“Valuation of Intangible Assets in Franchise Companies and Multinational Groups,” (co-author with Susan J. Robins), Franchise Law Journal, 2008.
“Tax Nexus Update for Franchisors,” LJN’s Franchising Business & Law Alert, 2005.
“Nexus Goes to Washington,” Franchising World, 2005.
“State and Local Taxation of Franchisor Income: They Are Out to Get You!” Franchising World, 2003.
“Meet the Experts: Franchises and Family Limited Partnerships,” The Franchisee Voice, 2002.
“Franchises and FLPs: Looking at the Benefits and Possible Problems That Franchisees Face,” LJN’s Franchising Business & Law Alert, 2002.
“Succession Planning for Franchisees,” Franchise Law Journal, 2001.
“How to Develop the Best Practices in Succession Planning for Franchisees,” LJN’s Franchising Business & Law Alert, 2001.
“Succession Planning for Franchisees: Save Taxes with Valuation Discounts,” Franchising World, 1999.
“Franchise Valuations: When Character, Isn’t Enough,” Journal of Lending & Credit Risk Management, 1998.
“Defamation and Form U-5,” Practising Law Institute Securities Arbitration, 1997.
“Proceeds From International Franchise Sale May Not be Allocated to Goodwill for Tax Purposes,” Business Franchise Guide, 1997.
“Succession Planning for Franchisors and Franchisees,” Leader’s Franchising Business & Law Alert, 1996
“The Cost of Acquisition of Franchises - Canterbury v. Commissioner,” Business Franchise Guide, 1992.
“New Tax Treatment and Reporting Requirements for Franchise Transfers: IRC Section 1060,” Franchise Legal Digest, 1989.
“Estate Planning for Franchises,” Taxation for Accountants, 1989.
“Tax Issues Affecting Franchising, with an Overview of the Tax Reform Act of 1986,” Practising Law Institute Franchising 1988: Business Strategies and Legal Compliance.
“Selected Tax Aspects of Franchising,” Practising Law Institute Franchising 1987: Business Strategies and Legal Compliance.
“Success Problems and the Closely Held Franchisor: The Personal Holding Company Tax,” Franchise Legal Digest, 1985.
“Franchisee Fee Collection: Reaping the Benefits of Franchise Tax Deductions,” Franchise Legal Digest, 1985.
“Rehabilitation Tax Credit: The Substantial Rehabilitation Test,” Tax Management Real Estate Journal, 1985.
“Avoiding the State Death Tax Disadvantages of the Unlimited Marital Deduction in Large Estates,” Estate Planning, 1983.
“Reasonable Compensation: Defending Against an IRS Attack,” The Practical Accountant, 1982.
“Tax Planning to Avoid the Accumulated Earnings Tax,” The Practical Accountant, 1982.
“Reasonable Compensation and Accumulated Earnings,” New York University 39th Annual Institute on Federal Taxation, 1981.
“Maximum Marital Deduction Clause Not Always the Best Choice,” Estate Planning, 1978.

Posted by Bruce S. Schaeffer on July 5th, 2012