<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: BUTTERFLY LIFE: Unhappy Franchisee Interview With Matt Wilson, Franchise Owner</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.everyjoe.com/articles/butterfly-life-unhappy-franchisee-interview-with-matt-wilson-atlanta-franchisee/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.everyjoe.com/articles/butterfly-life-unhappy-franchisee-interview-with-matt-wilson-atlanta-franchisee/</link>
	<description>Sports News - Tech Reviews - Entertainment - Life Tips for EveryJoe</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:24:16 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sean Kelly</title>
		<link>http://www.everyjoe.com/articles/butterfly-life-unhappy-franchisee-interview-with-matt-wilson-atlanta-franchisee/comment-page-1/#comment-305166</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean Kelly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 13:32:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.franchisepick.com/butterfly-life-unhappy-franchisee-interview-with-matt-wilson-atlanta-franchisee/#comment-305166</guid>
		<description>Carolyn:

Check out the comments and posts on Diversified Health on Unhappy Franchisee:
http://www.unhappyfranchisee.com/category/franchisor/diversified-health/

Also, the Butterfly Life discussions may have some post-Diversified comments:
http://www.unhappyfranchisee.com/butterfly-life-franchise-discussion/

You could also search comments on some of their other acquisitions.

Sorry to hear about your situation.  The Butterfly Life saga has been a heartbreaker for many.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Carolyn:</p>
<p>Check out the comments and posts on Diversified Health on Unhappy Franchisee:<br />
<a href="http://www.unhappyfranchisee.com/category/franchisor/diversified-health/" rel="nofollow">http://www.unhappyfranchisee.com/category/franchisor/diversified-health/</a></p>
<p>Also, the Butterfly Life discussions may have some post-Diversified comments:<br />
<a href="http://www.unhappyfranchisee.com/butterfly-life-franchise-discussion/" rel="nofollow">http://www.unhappyfranchisee.com/butterfly-life-franchise-discussion/</a></p>
<p>You could also search comments on some of their other acquisitions.</p>
<p>Sorry to hear about your situation.  The Butterfly Life saga has been a heartbreaker for many.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carolyn</title>
		<link>http://www.everyjoe.com/articles/butterfly-life-unhappy-franchisee-interview-with-matt-wilson-atlanta-franchisee/comment-page-/#comment-304941</link>
		<dc:creator>Carolyn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 02:21:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.franchisepick.com/butterfly-life-unhappy-franchisee-interview-with-matt-wilson-atlanta-franchisee/#comment-304941</guid>
		<description>I have had minimal conversation with Diverisifed Health and I informed them that I did not want to be any part of their &quot;support??&quot;.  

Why would I want to give them more $$$$

Now I just received a COLLECTION NOTICE in the mail for $31,500.00???!!!!

Do you know anyone else that this has happened to?

I need some help &amp; advice.

Thanks,
Carolyn
Pacifica (Butterfly) soon to be another name.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have had minimal conversation with Diverisifed Health and I informed them that I did not want to be any part of their &#8220;support??&#8221;.  </p>
<p>Why would I want to give them more $$$$</p>
<p>Now I just received a COLLECTION NOTICE in the mail for $31,500.00???!!!!</p>
<p>Do you know anyone else that this has happened to?</p>
<p>I need some help &amp; advice.</p>
<p>Thanks,<br />
Carolyn<br />
Pacifica (Butterfly) soon to be another name.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: carol cross</title>
		<link>http://www.everyjoe.com/articles/butterfly-life-unhappy-franchisee-interview-with-matt-wilson-atlanta-franchisee/comment-page-1/#comment-296654</link>
		<dc:creator>carol cross</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:05:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.franchisepick.com/butterfly-life-unhappy-franchisee-interview-with-matt-wilson-atlanta-franchisee/#comment-296654</guid>
		<description>We see Sean,  from these interviews with fallen franchisees of BFL,  that the franchisees all believed there was LITTLE RISK involved in the investments.  They were brought (in a devised &quot;hard sell&quot;) to sign long-term contracts that are malicious legal traps and that generally protect the franchisors from charges of fraudulent inducement to contract  in arbitration and court actions brought by failed and destroyed franchisees.            

The  hard sell pre-sale process that suggests &quot;earnings&quot;  and profits and little risk is SOP for the franchisors.   The FTC&#039;s lack of enforcement of illegal  earnings claims made outside of the actual FDD and the contract is in keeping with federal regulatory poicy.  

The FTC allows the franchisors to advertise and hype their franchises on the Internet and in the media but has taken franchisors  out from under &quot;Truth in Advertising Laws&quot;  and out from under the  common law fraud statutes of the 50 States.                       

The RISK of the investment in franchises can be hidden because of the &quot;constructive fraud&quot;  of the deceiving package of the government disclosure document (FDD) and the binding adhesory contract that acts as a red herring to OBSCURE the RISK  of the investment in the franchise,  whether a mature franchise or a new concept.   

This FAILURE of Regulatory Policy and our Congress  to protect franchisees and to, instead,  SUBSIDIZE franchisors and the other special interests  is a failure of democratic Capitalism.    Our courts are tainted in the process but the &quot;rich get rich&quot;  and the &quot;poor get poorer&quot; and &quot;trickle down economics&quot;  claim their victims.   

Let&#039;s hope the BFL franchisees make a loud noise heard in the Halls of Congress.  

 Let&#039;s hope that Matt Wilson understands that the government was complicit in that BFL knew that government regulation would permit them to OVERSEED and not to make timely disclosure of failure or unprofitability  to new prospective buyers of the BFL franchise.  

 Apparently,  our government only requires  franchisors to be copmpetent enough to comply with the 23 items of disclosure mandated by the FTC Rule.   If this means that franchisors use their contracts and regulation to lie, cheat and steal outside of contract,  so be it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We see Sean,  from these interviews with fallen franchisees of BFL,  that the franchisees all believed there was LITTLE RISK involved in the investments.  They were brought (in a devised &#8220;hard sell&#8221;) to sign long-term contracts that are malicious legal traps and that generally protect the franchisors from charges of fraudulent inducement to contract  in arbitration and court actions brought by failed and destroyed franchisees.            </p>
<p>The  hard sell pre-sale process that suggests &#8220;earnings&#8221;  and profits and little risk is SOP for the franchisors.   The FTC&#8217;s lack of enforcement of illegal  earnings claims made outside of the actual FDD and the contract is in keeping with federal regulatory poicy.  </p>
<p>The FTC allows the franchisors to advertise and hype their franchises on the Internet and in the media but has taken franchisors  out from under &#8220;Truth in Advertising Laws&#8221;  and out from under the  common law fraud statutes of the 50 States.                       </p>
<p>The RISK of the investment in franchises can be hidden because of the &#8220;constructive fraud&#8221;  of the deceiving package of the government disclosure document (FDD) and the binding adhesory contract that acts as a red herring to OBSCURE the RISK  of the investment in the franchise,  whether a mature franchise or a new concept.   </p>
<p>This FAILURE of Regulatory Policy and our Congress  to protect franchisees and to, instead,  SUBSIDIZE franchisors and the other special interests  is a failure of democratic Capitalism.    Our courts are tainted in the process but the &#8220;rich get rich&#8221;  and the &#8220;poor get poorer&#8221; and &#8220;trickle down economics&#8221;  claim their victims.   </p>
<p>Let&#8217;s hope the BFL franchisees make a loud noise heard in the Halls of Congress.  </p>
<p> Let&#8217;s hope that Matt Wilson understands that the government was complicit in that BFL knew that government regulation would permit them to OVERSEED and not to make timely disclosure of failure or unprofitability  to new prospective buyers of the BFL franchise.  </p>
<p> Apparently,  our government only requires  franchisors to be copmpetent enough to comply with the 23 items of disclosure mandated by the FTC Rule.   If this means that franchisors use their contracts and regulation to lie, cheat and steal outside of contract,  so be it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
