Certain written contractual agreements are sometimes loosely referred to as franchises, although they lack the essential elements in that they are not conferred by any sovereignty. The franchise system, or method of operation, has had a phenomenal growth in particular consumer product industries, such as automobile sales, fast foods, and ice cream. The use of a franchise in this manner has enabled individuals with minimal capital to invest to become successful members of the business community.
Under the most common method of operation, the cornerstone of a franchise system must be a trademark or trade name of a product. A franchise is a license from an owner of a trademark or trade name permitting another to sell a product or service under the name or mark. A franchisee agrees to pay a fee to the franchisor in exchange for permission to operate a business or sell a product or service according to the methods and procedures prescribed by the franchisor as well as under the trade name or trademark of the franchisor. The franchisee is usually granted an exclusive territory in which he or she is the only distributor of the particular goods or services in that area. The franchisor is usually obligated by contract to assist the franchisee through advertising, promotion, research and development, quantity purchasing, training and education, and other specialized management resources.
Before 1979 few state legislatures had enacted laws to protect prospective franchisees from being deceived by the falsehoods of dishonest franchisors. These laws, known as franchise disclosure laws, mandated that anyone offering franchises for sale in the state had to disclose material facts—such as the true costs of operating a franchise, any recurring expenses, and substantiated reports of profit earned—that would be instrumental in the making of an informed decision to purchase a franchise.
In states that did not have such legislation, the unsophisticated investor was at the mercy of the franchisor's statements. A victimized franchisee could sue a franchisor for breach of contract, but this was an expensive proposition for someone who typically had invested virtually all of his or her financial resources in an unprofitable franchise. Franchisors confronted with numerous lawsuits often would declare BANKRUPTCY so that the franchisees had little possibility of recouping any of their investments.
The FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION (FTC) received numerous complaints about inequitable and dishonest practices in the sale of such franchises. In late 1978, it issued regulations, effective October 21, 1979, that require franchisors and their representatives to disclose material facts necessary to make an informed decision about the proposed purchase of a franchise and that establish certain practices to be observed in the franchisor-franchisee relationship. These rules are collectively known as the Disclosure Requirements and Prohibitions Concerning Franchising and Business Opportunity Ventures, or more simply, the Franchise Rule.
A franchisor must disclose the background of the company—including the business experience of its high-level executives—for the previous five years; and whether any of its executives, within the last seven years, have been convicted of a felony, have pleaded nolo contendere to FRAUD, have been held liable in a civil action for fraud, are subject to any currently effective court order or ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY ruling concerning the franchise business or fraud, or have been involved in any proceedings for bankruptcy or corporate reorganization for insolvency during the previous seven years.
In addition, there must be a factual description of the franchise as well as an unequivocal statement of the total funds to be paid, such as initial franchise fees, deposits, down payments, prepaid rent on the location, and equipment and inventory purchases. The conditions and time limits to obtain a refund, as well as its amount, must be clear as well as the amount of recurring costs, such as ROYALTIES, rents, advertising fees, and sign rental fees. Any restrictions imposed—such as on the amount of goods or services to be sold, the types of customers with which the franchisee can deal—the geographical area, and whether the franchisee is entitled to protection of his or her territory by the franchisor must be discussed. The duration of the franchise, in addition to reasons why the franchise can be terminated or the franchisee's license not renewed when it expires, also must be explained. The number of franchises voluntarily terminated or terminated by the franchisor must be reported. The franchisor must disclose the number of franchises that were operating at the end of the previous year, as well as the number of company-owned outlets. The franchisee must also be supplied with the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the franchisees of the ten outlets nearest the prospective franchisee's location, so that the prospective franchisee can contact them to obtain a realistic perspective of the daily operations of a franchise.
If the franchisor makes any claims about the actual or projected sales of its franchises or their actual or potential profits, facts must be presented to substantiate such statements.
All of these facts—embodied in an accurately, clearly, and concisely written document—must be given to the prospective franchisee at the first personal meeting or at least ten days before any contractual relationship is entered or deposit made, whichever date is first. The purpose of this disclosure statement is to provide the potential investor with a realistic view of the business venture upon which he or she is about to embark. Failure to comply with the FTC regulation could result in a fine of up to $10,000 a day for each violation.
Some states have also enacted laws that prohibit a franchisor from terminating a franchise without good cause, which usually means that the franchisee has breached the contract. In such a case, the franchisor is entitled to reacquire the outlet—usually by repurchasing the franchisee's assets, such as inventory and equipment.
In states without "good cause" laws, franchisees claim that they are being victimized by franchisors who want to reclaim outlets that have proven to be highly profitable. They allege that the franchisor imposes impossible or ridiculous demands that cannot be met to harass the franchisee into selling the store back to the franchisor at a fraction of its value. Company-owned outlets yield a greater profit to the franchisor than the royalty payments received from the franchisee. Other franchisees claim that their licenses have been revoked or not renewed upon expiration because they complained to various state and federal agencies of the ways in which the franchisors operate. Such controversies usually are resolved in the courtroom.