Blog

Each year, the Franchise Times publishes its list of “Best Franchises to Buy,” also known as the “‘Zor Awards” (for those who aren’t in the know, “‘zor” is industry shorthand for “franchisor”). It recently published its list of award recipients for 2020, with the following franchises named the best in their respective categories: Around the House (Home Repair) – The Glass Guru Quick Flip (Quick-Service Burger Restaurants) – Culver’s Fresh Baked (Bakeries and Cafés) – McAlister’s Deli Cut & Dry (Lawn Care and Painting) – Five Star Painting Game, Set, Match (Sports Bars) – Twin Peaks After the Storm (Disaster Restoration) – Paul Davis Restoration Window Shopping (Retail) – uBreakiFix Sweat It Out (Boutique Fitness) – CycleBar Help Wanted (Employment and Staffing) – PrideStaff Bring it Home (Delivery and Takeout Pizza) – Toppers Methodology for the Franchise Times ‘Zor Awards So, what does it mean for a franchise to be named the “best” in its category by the Franchise Times? In How We Chose the ‘Zor Awards, the publication breaks down its selection process: Identifying Candidates for Inclusion – In order to be considered, a franchise must have fallen into one of the 10 categories listed above, and it must have been listed in the Franchise Times’ “Top 200+” database. The Franchise Times, “further narrowed the list by analyzing the quality of information in each brand’s Item 19 [disclosures] or other key financial data, and also focusing on brands that are currently expanding inside the United States.” Financial Metrics Focused […]

Read More

If you are serious about buying a franchise, you are most likely aware of the recommendation that you hire a lawyer to perform a franchise business review. But, with all of the up-front costs you will need to incur already, and since you are prepared to move forward even though the opportunity has its risks, do you really need to pay for a review? Of course, you know our answer already. With more than 30 years of experience in franchising, we have represented thousands of new and existing franchisees, and we have seen far too many franchisees struggle and lose their businesses simply because they failed to take the necessary precautions during the buying process. With this in mind, here are our top four reasons why we believe all prospective franchisees need franchise business reviews. Learn about Our Fixed-Fee Franchise Business Review Programs Are you thinking about buying a franchise? For more information about our firm’s fixed-fee franchise business review programs, call us at 202-293-3947 or inquire online today.

Read More

Rent-to-own operators Aaron’s Inc., Buddy’s Newco, LLC, and Rent-A-Center, Inc. agreed to settle FTC charges that they negotiated and executed reciprocal purchase agreements in violation of federal antitrust law. Rent-to-own operators Aaron’s Inc., Buddy’s Newco, LLC, and Rent-A-Center, Inc. agreed to settle FTC charges that they negotiated and executed reciprocal purchase agreements in violation of federal antitrust law. The complaints allege that from June 2015 to May 2018, Aaron’s, Buddy’s, and Rent-A-Center each entered into anticompetitive reciprocal agreements with each other and other competitors. The three proposed consent agreements prohibited the rent-to-own companies and their franchisees from entering into any reciprocal purchase agreement or inviting others to do so, and from enforcing the non-compete clauses still in effect from the past reciprocal purchase agreements. After a public comment period, the Commission announced the final consent agreements. DISSENTING STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER ROHIT CHOPRA Office of Commissioner Rohit Chopra UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Federal Trade Commission WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580     In the Matter of Rent-to-Own Market Allocation Scheme Commission File No. 1910074 February 21, 2020   Summary   The FTC uncovered evidence that three major rent-to-own players engaged in a market allocation scheme to close down stores that suppressed competition, but the agency is not asserting that this conduct was per se The proposed settlement deprives affected families of direct notification by the companies of their wrongdoing. This goes against a core element of competitive markets: the dissemination of truthful There is clear evidence that a senior executive served on the board […]

Read More

Legal Life after the Coronavirus Death for Small Businesses, Franchisees and Dealers By: Jeffrey M. Goldstein  www.goldlawgroup.com Second in a Series: COVID-19 HAS KILLED MY BUSINESS – MAY I LEGALLY TERMINATE MY CONTRACTS? Those who hope or believe that the consequences, effects, and sources of COVID-19 will soon be arrested and contained might be wondering whether their inability to have complied with their contracts, leases, and mortgages during this waiting period can lead to a subsequent termination of or suit under their agreements for failure to have fully complied with all of the contractual obligations in these contracts. Although I don’t anticipate that ‘other parties to your contracts’ individually or as a group are preparing or conspiring to terminate, default, or cancel anyone’s agreements, this does not rule out the high probability that when things return to normal (when market forces begin to work again unimpeded by the myriad current external shocks), every firm will naturally begin to focus again on ‘maximizing profits’ – the legitimate and necessary goal of individual suppliers in a free market economy. In general, whether you’re able to use COVID-19 as a legal ‘excuse’ for your inability to pay or otherwise perform during the coronavirus downtime is subject to whether the agreement in issue contains a provision or language that excuses your performance for unanticipated or unforeseen events. While many agreements contain such clauses, referred to as ‘force majeure’ clauses (clauses that excuse performance based on unexpected events such as floods, epidemics, riots, wars, etc.), […]

Read More

The coronavirus (COVID-19) (“the Virus”) has made it impossible or impracticable for many businesses to comply with their contracts. The party who must ultimately bear the loss associated with the Virus largely depends on whether the explicit language in their contract contains a ‘force majeure’ clause. In the absence of such language, liability for the non-performance will turn upon the law of ‘impossibility’ in the applicable jurisdiction. Not only has the Virus physically disabled those responsible for meeting contractual obligations, but it also has caused many state and local authorities to issue orders banning or severely restricting association, gatherings and travel, for instance, which, in turn, create such impossibility or impracticability. The evolution of the Virus, as well as government and business responses thereto (quarantine and containment orders), has caused many businessmen, and lawyers in unrelated niches, to ask whether any legal excuses exist to discharge promisors from contractual obligations impacted by the Virus. As discussed below, and as will be discussed in more detail in subsequent articles in this series, businesses, including franchisees, distributors and dealers, who find themselves unable to meet certain obligations in their contracts, should seek legal assistance to determine whether force majeure or the common law of impossibility or impracticability excuses their contractual performance. While force majeure generally refers to unforeseeable “acts of God,” impossibility is a broad-sweeping doctrine that picks up events and occurrences that arguably substantially impede performance even though they are not nature related (e.g., blindness or death of famous artist in […]

Read More

Even though many industries have been devastated by COVID-19, the Antitrust Division in the Department of Justice has publicly warned all companies that they still are ‘being watched’ by government trust-busters. The DOJ Press Release singles out manufacturers and distributors of health products such as face masks, respirators, and diagnostics. Search form Search ABOUT OUR AGENCY PRIORITIES NEWS RESOURCES CAREERS CONTACT You are here Home » Office of Public Affairs » News SHARE JUSTICE NEWS Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, March 9, 2020 Justice Department Cautions Business Community Against Violating Antitrust Laws in the Manufacturing, Distribution, and Sale of Public Health Products The Department of Justice today announced its intention to hold accountable anyone who violates the antitrust laws of the United States in connection with the manufacturing, distribution, or sale of public health products such as face masks, respirators, and diagnostics.  The department’s announcement is part of a broader administration effort to ensure that federal, state, and local health authorities, the private healthcare sector, and the public at large are in the strongest possible position to respond to the outbreak of the respiratory disease named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). “The Department of Justice stands ready to make sure that bad actors do not take advantage of emergency response efforts, healthcare providers, or the American people during this crucial time,” said Attorney General William P. Barr.  “I am committed to ensuring that the department’s resources are available to combat any wrongdoing and protect the public.” Individuals or companies […]

Read More

In January 2020, Franchise Direct published two articles, A Look at How Franchises Impact the Economy and Franchising by the Numbers, that provide a nice overview of the current state of the franchise industry. Here, franchise attorney Jeffrey M. Goldstein covers some of the highlights: 1. There are More than 750,000 Franchises in the U.S. with More than 8 Million Employees According to Franchise Direct, as of January 2020, “[i]n the United States, over 750,000 franchise establishments are operating and employ around 8.17 million people.” Franchise Direct also reports that another 13.3 million jobs are “supported by franchises.” Citing the most-recent economic data, Franchise Direct reports that gross revenue from franchisees topped $868 billion in 2016, compared with $675 billion a decade earlier. 2. Food Continues to Dominate the Franchise Industry Across all sectors, food establishments accounted for the most employment in franchising, providing just under 473,000 jobs across the country. Based on global sales data, the three most-successful U.S.-based franchises are McDonalds, 7-Eleven, and KFC. 3. Franchise Ownership Demographics are Shifting It used to be that the majority of franchise owners were middle-aged or older, and typically seeking to transition out of an unfulfilling job or use their career experience to build their own business. While this is still the case today, Franchise Direct reports that 12 percent of franchisees are now 34 years of age or younger, and more than half of franchisees (54 percent) own two or more outlets. 4.  Franchising is Expected to Continue Its Upward […]

Read More

On February 7, 2020, the International Franchise Association (IFA) published an article expressing its strong opposition to the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act (H.R. 2474), which passed in the U.S. House of Representatives on February 6. The PRO Act proposes to codify the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) joint-employer standard adopted in its highly-controversial Browning-Ferris decision from 2015. It would also adopt certain aspects of the California state court decision of Dynamex Operations West v. Superior Court, which created a so-called “ABC” test for determining whether an individual should be classified as an independent contractor or an employee. According to the IFA: “This bill would pose a massive threat to America’s 733,000 franchise businesses and the 7.6 million workers they employ. Already, the joint employer standard that this bill seeks to codify has cost the franchise industry $33.3 billion per year and led to a 93% increase in joint employment litigation. . . . [The PRO Act] could have the detrimental impact of turning every franchise owner into a de-facto employee of the brand.” The Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act (H.R. 2474) In its current form, the PRO Act, if enacted, would create a new standard for joint employment that follows the NLRB’s Browning-Ferris decision. In pertinent part, H.R. 2474 states: “Section 2(2) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 152(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘Two or more persons shall be employers with respect to an employee if each such […]

Read More

A recent article on 1851franchise.com discusses three ways that artificial intelligence (A.I.) has already made its way into the franchise industry, with a particularly-high adoption rate in the restaurant sector. Start-ups and well-established franchised brands are utilizing A.I. in a variety of ways—and they are forcing their franchisees to utilize A.I. as well. As a current (or prospective) franchisee, what do you need to know about the franchise industry’s acceptance of A.I. as a business development tool, risk mitigation tool and go-to-market strategy? Here are answers to some commonly-asked questions from national franchise attorney Jeffrey M. Goldstein: Q: How are Franchisors Requiring Franchisees to Make Use of A.I.? While artificial intelligence as something other than a sci-fi fantasy is still difficult for many people to grasp, the truth is that many companies are already using A.I. in many different ways. Within franchising, companies are utilizing A.I. for everything from tracking (and responding to) consumer sentiment to taking orders in-person and online. Q: Who Bears the Cost of Adopting New A.I. Technologies? Predictably, franchisors are forcing franchisees to bear the cost of adopting new A.I. technologies. Franchisors almost universally reserve the right to require franchisees to adopt system “updates” at their own expense, and most franchise agreements do not place any limits on the nature, frequency or cost of updates franchisors can require. Q: Can Franchisors Force Franchisees to Abandon Old Technologies in Favor of A.I.? In most cases, yes. Uniformity and “standards” are hallmarks of the franchise system, and franchisors […]

Read More

Lots of franchisors claim to offer “recession-proof” franchises. The basic idea behind this claim is that the products or services their franchisees offer either: (i) are so essential that people will need to pay for them no matter what, or (ii) come into even higher demand when the economy takes a downturn. While both of these make sense in theory, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that no franchise opportunity guarantees success. Even if your business is capable of surviving during a recession, this does not mean that it will survive during a recession (or even during more prosperous times). Recession-Resistant Franchise Sectors Perhaps, then, the term “recession-proof” isn’t quite as apt as “recession-resistant.” A recent article on Entrepreneur.com uses this term to describe five franchise sectors that might be less susceptible to economic contraction: Restoration Services – “[C]ompanies in the restoration business will always have customers. . . . Plus, much of the work is paid for through various types of insurance so the bulk of the bill may not fall to the homeowner.” Senior Home Care – America is getting older . . . [and] [s]enior home care allows . . . non-medical caregivers to come to seniors’ homes and help them with everyday chores they aren’t able to do themselves for a fraction of what senior living communities would charge.” Hair Care – “People may cut back on some personal grooming services, but hair care is rarely one of them. . . . […]

Read More