3 ms·
Actions of the franchisees reflect on the brand (that's the point of franchise agreements). In case I want to avoid giving this guy money (as is my right as a
by InitialLastName 5y ago
Actions of the franchisees reflect on the brand (that's the point of franchise agreements). In case I want to avoid giving this guy money (as is my right as a consumer under capitalism), how can I easily confirm which franchises his company owns? I can't, you say? Well, next time I want to eat mediocre food in a bland corporate environment, I'll have to go to Chili's instead.
- burntwater 5y agoIn case anyone is wondering, Applebee's and Chili's are in fact two separate companies, not owned by the same head corporation. https://www.businessofbusiness.com/articles/happy-hour-showdown-applebees-chilis-and-tgi-fridays/ https://www.businessofbusiness.com/articles/happy-hour-showd...
- function_seven 5y agoExactly. It's totally reasonable to attribute to the larger brand the shitty actions of their franchisees. That's the downside to licensing out your brand and image to separate businesses. Their actions taint the same brand. You can't be "Applebees" when you're doing good, then become "Apple Central" when you're getting shady. It's also why many businesses refuse to sell franchises in the first place. Doing so reduces your quality control.