NZ franchisee willing to sell $830,000 store for $1

August 27, 2008

An interesting story on the true value of a franchise.

  • From a strictly financial perspective, most franchises have a negative net present value (ie. they actually produce a decrease in capital rather than an increase).
  • Investors are for the most part, very very inaccurate in their appraisal of franchise offerings. They are successfully encouraged to deceive themselves.

This follows up on my original August 8th posting called Tied buying creates a Hidden franchise fee.

Hell has been torture for Matt Blomfield – so he’s auctioning his $830,000 Auckland store for a $1 reserve.

Mr Blomfield, a Hell Pizza franchisee, is so fed up with the New Zealand owner TPF Group’s handling of the business that he’s willing to take a loss selling up his five stores.

“I just want to get the business sold, pay all the bills and move on with my life.”

The reporter Errol Kiong goes on to mention:

The Herald has also sighted emails from franchisees complaining of the lack of support from TPF, the high cost of ingredients – which they can only purchase from TPF’s own supply and distribution operation – and what they say is unsatisfactory marketing.

Ineffective marketing, lack of support and franchisors gouging franchisees on supplies are very, very common problems cited around the world.

Advertisements

Tied buying creates a Hidden franchise fee

August 8, 2008

This is an interesting article from Kiwi’s Sunday Star Times.

Journalist Greg Ninnesson reports in Marriage made in Hell for upset pizza franchisees that some of Hell Pizza’s franchisees are not pleased with the new mandatory supply arrangements.

No wonder: A monopoly is bad for the whole economy because it leads to inefficient allocation of capital and unjustified profitability [economic rent] based in deceit.

A meeting of several dozen franchisees held in February expressed dissatisfaction with the supply arrangements for their ingredients and other goods.

Previously, each franchisee bought ingredients such as flour, cheese, meat and vegetables directly from independent suppliers on a contract basis.

But in February, TPF set up its own supply and distribution operation and its outlets were required to buy most of their ingredients through that.

The franchisees were concerned about the transparency of the new supply arrangements and the effect it could have on rising food costs.

Maybe forming an independent franchisee association would be a good first step. But you better chip in a few $1,000 each [to start] for the best franchisee-only lawyer you can find.

  • Compare the cost to a 1% increase in your Cost of Goods per year. [You don’t honestly think this is the start of the blood-letting, do you?]

This is how I coded the article as it went into the Information Sharing Project:

  • Advertising fund put into general franchisor’s coffers,
  • Advertising fund use disagreements,
  • Franchisee revolt,
  • Franchisor owns more than one system (subsidizes loses from cash cow)
  • Gouging on supplies,
  • Monopoly,
  • Profits from one franchise system sucked out to subsidize another one,
  • Supply margins are a hidden added royalty payment,
  • Must buy only through franchisor (tied buying), and
  • Veil of secrecy.

Kickbacks, listing fees, volume discounts, co-op $, etc. are a beautiful thing to behold: If you are the franchisor.

  • Were you promised that volume buying through a franchise would actually save you money?

See the American Franchisee Association‘s, The Twelve Worst Franchise Agreement Provisions which include:

  • Sole Sourcing Requirements
  • Lack of Accountability of Advertising Fund
  • Kickbacks

%d bloggers like this: