Where is Bob Purvin these days?

Sorry about that!

Yes! Based on my research, the same would hold true if it was 75% –and probably the SBA would guarantee the loans if the franchise didn’t reflect a very high rate of default in the SBA system. It is my belief that the SBA will guarantee loans as long as the franchisor has an FDD and a signed contract that protects the franchisor from claims of fraudulent inducement in the courts. The SBA is, of course, not away of the failure of franchisees who negotiate other than SBA Loans or who continue to pay on startup debt of loans in order to avoid bankruptcy and the loss of their collateral, usually their home.

Remember that both Robert Purvin (Author of Franchise Fraud) of the AAFD and Susan Kezios of the American Franchisee Assolciation have indicted to the FTC over ten years ago in public statements that the failure to make the franchisor disclose any historical financial performance statistics on a UNIT basis to new buyers of their franchise is, in their opinion, misleading by omission.

Please Read the Franchise Times Article “Experts weigh in on franchisees’ lawsuit against Peaberry Coffee” in a GOOGLE Search. You see that an Expert Witness, Michael Seid, who wrote the book “Franchising for Dummies” defends that franchisors need only to comply with the FTC Rule to legally sell franchises to the public.

How did the FTC come to design a Rule that would permit franchisors to hide/obscure the failure rate and profitability rate of units in their systems from new buyers of the franchise?

Of course, the government didn’t intend that franchisors would use the FTC Rule to sell franchises with 75% or 50% or 30% or 20% failure rates and hoped, I assume, that the failure rates and unprofitability rates of franchises would remain loan enough to fly under the radar —-say 10% or less.

They goverment rationalized, I’m sure, that those 10% who failed shouldn’t be allowed to take down the franchisor and the franchisees who would succeed because, of course, franchising does feed the economy and, therefore, the greater good. If franchisors could be successfully sued in arbitration or the courts for fraudulent inducement to contract and the franchisees were returned to “whole” the cost to the franchisors could threaten their existence.

But, when franchisors are permitted under the FTC Rule and the state FDD’s to sell franchises at any degree of risk of failure and lack of profitability as indicated by unit historical performance of the system, this is WRONG and should be stopped.

The franchisors know that the present status quo of law and regulation together with their signed boilerplate/adhesory/self-serving contracts generally protect them in the courts because the courts are obligated and have the duty to uphold the written words of commercial contracts and to support federal regulatory policy that is driven by the will of The Congress of the United States.

the way the new corporate office is a PO box in a UPS store…
The corporate office resides within a UPS Store?
How’s that for franchise irony?

Not to mention that these jokers are not smart enough and to cheap to ever have a mail server or web server. My guess is that did’nt pay someone. I haven’t done the math yet but maybe someone can figure out the perecentage of clubs listed as closed or never opened compared to the advertised “218″ open.

What about Japan? Ireland & the Bahamas they’ve dropoped off the map.

These 2 sociopaths are the lowest of low and the sad thing is that they dragged their families into it as well, although [del] isn’t bright enough to get a real job anyway, he had no choice. And as far as the “loyal” employess that are still with these dirtbags… get a real job and maybe you’ll get you’re self respect back. As far as I’m concerned your complicit and subject to the same consequences that these jokers will face.

G&G I hope you like institutional food that is if someone doesn’t steal it from you before you can eat it.