With more than 3,500 active franchisors encompassing over 75 different industries, how can franchise companies compete for new franchisees? The very essence of this question may explain why one of…
Read More
In determining whether franchise associations will benefit or undermine a franchise system one must first determine the manner in which the association is to be organized and secondly, the purpose behind the proposed formation. Generally, franchisee associations are either formed by franchisees themselves, primarily for their own interest, or they are formed by the franchisor, primarily for the franchisor’s interest first and secondarily that of the franchisees.
The Good
If a franchise association is being formed by the franchisor rather than franchisees, the association is customarily denoted a Franchise Advisory Council (“FAC”). As the name connotes, FAC’s are purely advisory. Organizational, communication, travel and other expenses are normally paid by the franchisor. Franchisors considering whether to form a FAC usually look for the best and most loyal franchisees to be on one or more committees to advise the franchisor on topics such as marketing, new product development, reporting and operations. FAC’s are a good mechanism for franchisors to obtain valuable input from prime franchisees. Because franchisees feel that they are a team member and their contribution is meaningful (which it should be), the FAC members normally give the franchisor their endorsement which in turn draws the support of the entire franchise system.
The Bad
When an association is formed by franchisees rather than the franchisor, the franchisee association usually involves a conflicting economic interest with that of the franchisor. Franchisees sometimes find that by pooling together their resources they jointly have a much louder and stronger voice. As a result, a franchisor is much more apt to listen and address complaints of franchisees. Unfortunately, for many franchise systems, franchisee associations formed to address a single issue common to the system expands to include a wide range of issues, including issues that might have otherwise been addressed by a FAC. An example of this change of direction occurs in the franchise system discussed in an article appearing in the magazine, Franchise Times. The story is about a franchisee association initially formed for the sole purpose of helping franchisees survive a number of lean financial years. After the franchisees were again profitable, the franchisee association changed its purpose and became primarily concerned with decoupling the franchise brand from that of the franchisor’s parent company. Neither franchisor nor franchisee could ever have foreseen the total change of direction.
The Ugly
The ugly referenced in our title occurs when politicians and academia get involved. Today there is growing sentiment that franchisee associations should be treated like labor unions and be granted an antitrust exemption. With this type of protection franchisee associations could engage in collective bargaining and be free to negotiate royalties, advertising fees, operational issues, termination rights and many other facets of the franchise system.
Like so many aspects of franchising, the decision of whether associations should be allowed in your system depends upon the intent of formation. Before agreeing to an association contact our firm. Together we can look at the legal ramifications pertaining to an association. Perhaps it may be more important to be proactive and form a franchisee advisory council yourself, or address the specific issues without even having to address the formation of an association. The choices you make can mean a win-win for all parties or the ultimate demise of your entire franchise system.
To have these posts sent directly to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletter here.
Traditionally, consumer promotions featuring games of chance, lotteries and sweepstakes have generated new sales and given Franchisors increased brand name recognition. In fact, an article in The Wall Street Journal noted sweepstake sites were a growing segment of the Internet. Sounds like a winner doesn’t it? It can be a winner if your company follows the rules.
Almost every state has codified a set of rules to regulate promotional contests. At the federal level, various agencies are empowered to initiate enforcement actions where prize, chance and consideration are inherent in the contest. Internationally, our neighbors to the north in Canada prohibit any pure game of chance. In Latin America countries like Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela and Columbia, promotional contests require prior governmental approval. This is also true of many European and Asian countries.
In a world filled with complex governmental regulations and judicial decisions, which vary from one area to the next, is there a “bright-line rule” to guide us? Fortunately, the answer is yes. As a general rule, to fall within a regulated activity the promotion must encompass each of the following: 1) a prize; or 2) chance, with mandatory consideration. A prize usually connotes anything of value awarded to the contestant. The value only has to be minimal. Thus, even discount coupons awarded may be sufficient to fulfill the definition. Chance refers to some random means of determination. Perhaps the most striking example of this random determination is the Reader’s Digest and Publisher’s Clearing Sweepstakes. Consideration may be the most unsettled area of the “bright-line rule” because one would normally believe it had to be in a monetary form, for example, the purchase of a product. This approach is actually followed in the majority of states. But there are several states that have taken the approach that the consideration may also be non-monetary. In these states the mere completion of an informational questionnaire may trigger the state’s definition of consideration.
To ensue compliance with our “bright-line rule,” creative marketers have skillfully crafted contests which focus on eliminating either chance or mandatory consideration. By making the contest a game of skill, the contestant is judged on their ability to perform an act. For instance, a contest involving “trivia” judges a contestant on their ability to correctly answer questions, thus the element of chance is eliminated. The second method commonly used is the elimination of mandatory consideration. By offering consumers a choice, the criteria of “mandatory” is eliminated. We all have seen this approach in the Pepsi and Coca-Cola games of chance or in any number of franchised fast food restaurant games. The customer is provided a game card when they make a purchase, but the contest also allows anyone to send off for a free card without any purchase. Thus, there is an alternative means of entering the promotional contest without any required purchase – no mandatory consideration.
CONCLUSION
Promotional contests can be a big winner for your franchise company and your franchisees if you have properly planned in advance. Begin your plan by making sure franchise legal counsel is a part of your planning team. A well-laid plan will make your company a winner rather than the next defendant in a lawsuit.
To have these posts sent directly to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletter here.
We all acknowledge the importance of seeing our doctor annually for a physical checkup. Unfortunately, when it comes to the well-being of your franchise business, many companies never consider the importance of an annual legal checkup. If you are not reviewing documents or systems yearly, then new technology, new legislation or changing case law among other factors, may put your franchise business at risk.
Statistics show that most franchise systems which fail, do so within the first five years, principally for one or more of the following: undercapitalization; poor operations; lack of training and support; selling franchises for survival; lack of the skills required to be a successful Franchisor; or, looking only at the short term rather than building for the long-term. All of these failure precepts are likely to result in litigation against the franchise entity and against the principals and franchise sellers of the Franchisor, who are likely to be sued individually by the disgruntled franchisees. Without question, such litigation can be avoided by the company regularly consulting with its franchise attorney to provide advice and guidance in advance of any legal entanglements.
The need for a legal checkup is not just for the new Franchisor. For the mature Franchisor to be successful, there must be constant innovation and change. Change facilitates resistance from franchisees and requires close legal support from the planning stage through the implementation of the change.
A clear example of change occurred when McDonald’s added breakfast to its franchise system. Suddenly franchisees were faced with increased cost, not just for additional equipment, but new labor cost and having to manage a whole new process.
Without legal input prior to implementing the modification, McDonalds would have been in court for years from suits by their own franchisees.
In a field so seemingly narrow as franchising, it is always interesting to me that few law students and law professors have ever heard of and many, perhaps the majority of practicing lawyers, likewise have no awareness of and do not recognize the field of franchise law and the fact that there are so many subcategories of the law to consider. Franchising is filled with numerous subfields starting with the law of contracts and includes the core of franchising, trademarks, trade secrets and copyrights. Always present in franchising are antitrust issues, changing laws, litigation and the rapidly developing areas of joint liability and ostensible agency. From the initial prospect package through the termination of a dissident franchisee, a Franchisor’s records, information and processes should be reviewed no less than annually and, when necessary, updated, modified or changed to meet legal requirements.
CONCLUSION
Does your company conduct an annual legal checkup? Will you be one of the casualties when the list of former franchise companies is posted? How successful do you want to be?
To have these posts sent directly to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletter here.
If there is one thing you can be sure of, it is the fact that change is imminent. In Franchising, if you don’t stay in touch with the market or consumer demands, you are setting a course for extinction. I am sure everyone can think of multiple examples of companies that remained static and are no longer with us today.
As a Franchisor, you are constantly evaluating and modifying the Franchise System to determine how new products, advancing technologies and changing consumer demands might affect your bottom line. Modifying the Franchise Systems occur in many forms. At one point, McDonalds did not serve breakfast. The modification of their Franchise System required a major investment by both Franchisees and McDonalds, with new equipment, advertising, additional labor cost and additional training. Almost all of the pizza franchises added delivery service to their system. Today you see many concepts that co-brand with other Franchise concepts. When you walk into a convenience store there are usually several franchise concepts in place under one roof. Computer technology has required many companies to modify a Franchisor’s system to stay abreast of competition.
Unfortunately, no matter how hard you work to lay the groundwork for changes to your Franchise System, there will always be one or more hostile franchisees who, even though they bought the franchise for your expertise, think they know more than expire. Be prepared for the argument that your modifications have caused a constructive termination of their Franchise Agreement or that you have modified or amended the original contract without their required written consent or that you have violated the covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
Fortunately, the good news is that courts around the country generally uphold a Franchisor’s right for modifying the Franchise System – when the Franchisor has reserved the right to do so in its Franchise Agreement. The key is reserving your right to make modifications. It is important that your franchising counsel is part of your planning team so that counsel knows what your future expectations are and can help build your documents to avoid franchisee disputes. Before making modifications to your Franchise System, be sure you have the legal ability to implement the system change. If the subject of your future Franchise System Modifications is not already on your list, make sure to add it to our annual legal checkup review.