The Carol Cross Manifesto

View Comments

• Guest: — Why are you pushing Signworld on a site intended for unhappy franchisees and named Unhappy Franchisee.com?

  Thanks for pointing out another advantage of franchising for franchisors and another difference between licensors and franchisors. The franchisors under the usual malicious contract do have access to the POS software and to the gross sales and to the business tax returns of their franchisees — and the licensors do not have this access.

• moved from https://unhappyfranchisee.mystagingwebsite.com/signworld-vp-jack-werner-fires-back-at-critics/

  “Why are you pushing Signworld on a site intended for unhappy franchisees”

  It’s obvious that you don’t even read the articles where you paste your repetitious nonsense. The subject of the article is Signworld.

• Makes you wonder why the Commerce Department, itself, STOPPED gathering objective statistics on franchising in the late 80’s —doesn’t it? This was almost ten years after the federal regulation of franchising

  How can you trust those SBA statistics that are used to advise the banks of defaults on small business loans, when the real failure of the “founding” franchisees is hidden through government-enabled churning that subsidizes this business model on behalf of the franchisors and the other special interests?

• Carol,

  So let me see if I get your position right, all franchises. licenses, distributorships, dealerships and resellers are to be avoided because they all have agreements that puts the owners of these various distribution models/systems in a superior position to those who buy at the unit-level?

  Chris Cross

• To Guest,
  By trying to put Carol Cross down you are only showing how stupid you really are. I don't need to stand up for Carol as she does that on her own but after reading your post I was so disgusted I felt I had to say something. You show no logic in any of your posts and should go back under the rock you crawled out from under. Everyone has an opinion but you sir are a prime reason why abortion is legal and it's too bad your mother didn't pull the plug on you at conception.

• Chris Cross said "Carol, So let me see if I get your position right, all franchises. licenses, distributorships, dealerships and resellers are to be avoided because they all have agreements that puts the owners of these various distribution models/systems in a superior position to those who buy at the unit-level?"

  Carol is against any form of indirect distribution unless the licensees/franchisees/distributors are told ahead of time what they will earn. I would imagine she is against all small business ownership unless it comes with a crystal ball.

  Her family business failed so she's anti-small business. Period.

  Sally said "you sir are a prime reason why abortion is legal and it’s too bad your mother didn’t pull the plug on you at conception."

  Wow. To wish death upon those you disagree with. Classy! Can you say... psychopath?

• guest says Wow. To wish death upon those you disagree with. Classy! Can you say… psychopath? Ya I can and you are one!!!!!!!!!!!!

• Guest doesn't like my message and misrepresents what I said. Of course, nobody can tell you ahead of time what you will earn --BUT the franchisor should disclose the "earnings history" of the units in the system and as the seller who profits from the sale of the franchise, the franchisor should have the obligation under the law to disclose these material UNIT earnings statistics to new buyers of the franchisor.

  Get educated and read "Franchising Fraud - The continuing need for reform" in a Google Search) If the unit performance statistics indicate that profitability is low or nil and that a high percentage of "founding" franchisees have failed, new buyers, of course, would not invest their life savings in these franchises. This failure to disclose unit performance to new buyers is the flaw in the FTC Rule that encourages "fraudulent inducement to contract."

  In the Article "Freedom to Defraud - Making Michigan Safe for Fraud" (do a Google Search) the author, Howard Yale Lederman says: "By definition, fraud in the inducement involves precontract fraudulent concealment or representations that are contrary to or different from the contract provisions. Indeed, fraud in the inducement involves enticing prospects with promises when the promissor intends to keep the promises out of the contract. Few fraudulent inducement claims can survive execution of a contract containing an integration provision."

  Obviously, with the integration provisions and, now, the reliance clauses in contracts and the new case law that makes scienter more difficult to prove and plausability an issue in summary judgments, the franchisors and the licensors feel very confident that they can commit torts and fraud under cover of regulation and contract law.

  Under SEC law, information is considered "material" if, when disclosed, it would prevent the buyer from making the investment. Under FTC Regulation, the franchisors believe they can withhold this material information under cover of regulation with immunity under the law because of the integration, acknowledgement, and reliance clauses that are routine terms of franchise and distributor contracts. Under SEC law, there is a private right of action for violation of SEC rules. Under the FTC Regulation of Franchising, there is no private right of action when the Rule is violated.

  Unfortunately for franchisees and licensees, it is not just Michigan that has been made safe for fraud. Those who are interested should look at the Coffee Beanery Litigation in Michigan and the Peaberry Coffee Litigation in the Appeals Court in Colorado. Amicus Briefs have been submitted to the Appeals Court in Colorado to support the positions of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants.

  http://thegreatfranchisingrobbery.blogspot.com/

• Carol -

  We're waiting for your brilliant reply. Where are you?

  Chris Cross

• Carol claims the "franchisor should have the obligation under the law to disclose these material UNIT earnings statistics to new buyers of the franchisor."

  Frandata reports that 35% of all franchisors voluntarily provide financial performance information in their FDDs. IL & MD reports 40% of those registered in their states provide that info. See http://www.bluemaumau.org/7899/elusive_earnings_claim

  If Carol was truthful about her real intentions she would praise the 40% who provide the info she says is important and warn against the 60% that don't. But she does not praise the 40% or even acknowledge them because really she is against all franchises and the franchise relationship in general. Why does she call for a government mandate of financial performance when she is still against the 40% that provide it?