The Sure Thing
Are existing franchise systems always a better bet than startups?
By Devlin Smith
| March 17, 2003
URL:
http://www.entrepreneur.com/franchises/franchisezone/viewpoint/article60376.html
While franchises offer investors a proven concept and tested
business model, they don't offer guarantees of success. For
further insurance, many prospective franchisees select more
established systems with a known name and reputation, and steer
away from newer franchise concepts. But is older always better?
Franchise Zone spoke with Kevin Lewis, president and CEO of
hotel chain Suburban Franchise Systems of America Inc., about the
pros and cons of joining new and existing systems. Here's what
Lewis had to say about picking the best opportunity for you.
Franchise Zone: Is it better for franchisees to join new or
established systems?
Kevin Lewis: It depends on the product and the market.
For instance, if a concept has high barriers to entry and a unique
selling proposition with a lot of upside potential, I may consider
it. However, a lot of franchise systems come into existence where
the barriers of entry are easy, and the value proposition goes away
quite quickly when the concept is either easy to copy or the market
changes. Given that and the amount of the investment, I would
recommend people really sticking with companies that are tried and
true, have a proven track record, a good balance sheet and [proven]
profitability. You have to really understand the management people
involved and their philosophy, because you're buying into that
corporate culture.
What are some of the benefits to being part of an existing
system?
The bugs have been worked out; you're not a guinea pig.
You've got critical mass, systems in place, a franchise culture
that already exists. Startup franchises typically come from people
who had their own corporate stores but don't fully understand
how to deal with the relationship side of the franchise
business.
Are there any downsides to buying into an existing
system?
There's probably less [of an] upside when you look at
opportunity. There's more risk on a startup, but when you look
at some of the hot concepts, [the first franchisees] made a lot of
money. There comes a point in time where saturation can occur and
those systems don't do quite as well.
What questions should someone considering a newer system ask
to see how stable the company is?
I'd like to know their financial status, who their major
competitors are, what the barriers to entry are. Is it a product
that can be easily copied, and is the market moving in that
direction? Does there seem to be adequate demand?
Are there any other advantages to being part of a new
system?
First franchisees typically can get more favorable terms,
because the franchise organization will be looking to make better
deals or discount franchise fees in order to encourage development.
Being first in and a pioneer isn't all that bad--there is risk,
but you're going to gain some benefit as to prime territories
and locations. In a more mature system, you don't have that
opportunity, because somebody else has already taken that risk and
those locations.
Is there a certain type of franchisee who is better suited to
joining a newer system?
People who are real entrepreneurs, real risk takers. Or it may
not be the only franchise operation they're involved
with--they're diversified, they understand how the game is
played and can afford some risk. But for a first time out of the
box, I wouldn't recommend it. I wouldn't learn how a
franchise system works on a risky venture.
Are there risks involved with buying into established
systems, too?
No question. You have to look at their history as far as
terminations. Every franchise organization is required by law to
report how many businesses have left the franchise system, so you
can get a feel for the flow of in and out. Look at the litigation
section of their offering circular, see what types of litigation
are against the company. Also, I would contact some of the existing
franchisees involved in that type of business. Ask them the hard
questions, because a lot of the sales material franchisors give out
may paint a rosy picture, and it may be a very good opportunity,
but you still want to know the risks.
How would you find out if the market for an existing
franchise is getting saturated?
If you like the business model, ultimately you'll probably
do some sort of market analysis that entails hiring a third party.
In our business, we require, and lenders typically require, a
third-party feasibility and market analysis that looks at the
depths of the market. Every franchise system or any product or
service you're selling has certain criteria you can look
at.
Is there any simple way prospective franchisees can figure
out for themselves whether it would be better to be in a new system
or an existing system?
Really, I think it all comes down to how much risk you are
willing to take. There are some people who want something tried and
true; they don't want to be a pioneer. Then there are those who
say, "I'm a risk-taker. I like the concept, and I'll
do it." Some people are pioneers and some like the comfort of
knowing someone's gone before them.
Are there any other issues to consider when looking at new
and existing franchises?
It's important, whatever you choose, to do your homework.
Also, be aware that your ability to access capital sometimes is
dependent on whether the product is proven. Lenders also evaluate
risk; if a concept isn't proven, your capital profile is
related to that.
Copyright ©
2009 Entrepreneur.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy