Are Brokers (Coach/Consultant) Perpetuating Franchise Myths?

Indubitably..

It is a constant source of both irritation and amusement to me that the franchise industry claims regularly that the biggest source of conflict within franchising is unrealistic expectations, yet perpetuates these expectations in its industry propaganda and sales pitches.

While I would expect brokers to do or say whatever makes them the sale,  franchise myths are perpetuated by just about every franchisor type body on earth with wild abandon and supposedly independent bodies enable them by spewing forth the same propaganda. (see the ACCC's latest guide to franchising or Griffith Universities latest education pre entry education program)

Take this little gem from the Franchise Council of Australia's Website about the advantages of franchising.

The franchisee taps into the bulk purchasing power and negotiating capacity made available by the franchisor by reason of the size of the franchised network.

This can be true and it can also be as far from the truth as Pluto is from Earth.

So the franchisees expectations are set up by the zor sales pitch and then reinforced by these spurious lists of "advantages of franchising."

People start to beleive that if something is a franchise IT MUST offer better purchasing power because that is what franchising DOES, as if it was some default occurrence-  they think If it is a franchise and franchising offers better buying power then that must mean that my franchise will offer better buying power- QED.

Fallacy.

Much like the "franchising is safer than non franchised business" myth.

No wonder franchisees cry foul when they don't get what they think they have paid for.

The franchise propaganda machine works so well that it sets up even good systems for failure.

These "advantages" are often presented as absolutes when really a franchisee needs to look at these so called advantages and figure out if the system they are considering actually will offer these benefits. Or if they purport to offer them but the Contract or Ops manual actually voids these advangtages.

The industry spin giveth but the model/contract taketh away.

It is supremely foolish to compare and contrast all types franchises with all types business and derive a useful conclusion on which path might offer greater chance of success. First of all the data is faulty and even if it weren't faulty the conclusion would still be useless.

Not all franchises are investment worthy, but I dare you to open up an independent taco QSR vs.a Taco Bell or a fried chicken joint vs. a KFC. On the other hand could you open a crepe shop and be as successful as a franchised crepe shop? Probably! It all boils down to finding value with what you are buying with a specific franchise.

In conclusion I'd never trust some idiot from the TES or any "no fee franchise consultant" to help me choose how I should have my eggs in the morning let alone what franchise I should buy. The problem with buying a franchise is really that buyers are too casual about the process and don't perform meaningful due diligence. Heck many people think that using someone like TES is due diligence.

[Except for Oldsaw who was duped after performing astoundingly masterful due diligence. Oldsaw's nescience knows no bounds.]

If someone other than the franchisor's employees are listing/selling, RUN, PASS.

A rule-of-thumb valid 95% of the time.

I apologize, in advance, for all the honest "consultants" out there.

[go Netherlands!]