aid, the regulators will re-define what they previously defined that led to the law of unintended consequences causing the conflict in the first place.

Indeed it is a cluster muck of biblical proportions much worse than the Spaghetti Bowl they call a freeway there. What happens to the 23-ye

In the United States we have many folks that wish to realize their American Dream and to many people that means owning a business of their own. We also have rules and regulations that are to enforce the franchising model, but are we truly helping the consumer from the Big Bad Corporate Franchisors out to get the little guys?

Well it turns out that Franchising has one of the lowest fraud rates of any business model in America and there really is not real crime or fraud going on. Oh, sure there are a few cases now and again where some franchisor failed to fill out a form correctly or something of this nature, but in reality there is not criminal intent. Mostly market place differences of opinion between franchisors and franchisees; so are the Federal Regulatory bodies doing their regulating properly?

The whole thing is a sham really in my opinion; help the consumer? No, most of what the regulatory bodies do end up costing the consumer, as any fines or penalties are passed onto buyers anyway and also any lawyer fees incurred. It just raises the cost of the future franchise fees. When the regulatory bodies modify the laws after such cases and all the lawyers get paid, the regulators will re-define what they previously defined that led to the law of unintended consequences causing the conflict in the first place.

Indeed it is a cluster muck of biblical proportions much worse than the Spaghetti Bowl they call a freeway there. What happens to the 23-yea

s out to get the little guys?

Well it turns out that Franchising has one of the lowest fraud rates of any business model in America and there really is not real crime or fraud going on. Oh, sure there are a few cases now and again where some franchisor failed to fill out a form correctly or something of this nature, but in reality there is not criminal intent. Mostly market place differences of opinion between franchisors and franchisees; so are the Federal Regulatory bodies doing their regulating properly?

The whole thing is a sham really in my opinion; help the consumer? No, most of what the regulatory bodies do end up costing the consumer, as any fines or penalties are passed onto buyers anyway and also any lawyer fees incurred. It just raises the cost of the future franchise fees. When the regulatory bodies modify the laws after such cases and all the lawyers get paid, the regulators will re-define what they previously defined that led to the law of unintended consequences causing the conflict in the first place.

Indeed it is a cluster muck of biblical proportions much worse than the Spaghetti Bowl they call a freeway there. What happens to the 23-ye

something of this nature, but in reality there is not criminal intent. Mostly market place differences of opinion between franchisors and franchisees; so are the Federal Regulatory bodies doing their regulating properly?

The whole thing is a sham really in my opinion; help the consumer? No, most of what the regulatory bodies do end up costing the consumer, as any fines or penalties are passed onto buyers anyway and also any lawyer fees incurred. It just raises the cost of the future franchise fees. When the regulatory bodies modify the laws after such cases and all the lawyers get paid, the regulators will re-define what they previously defined that led to the law of unintended consequences causing the conflict in the first place.

Indeed it is a cluster muck of biblical proportions much worse than the Spaghetti Bowl they call a freeway there. What happens to the 23-ye

most of what the regulatory bodies do end up costing the consumer, as any fines or penalties are passed onto buyers anyway and also any lawyer fees incurred. It just raises the cost of the future franchise fees. When the regulatory bodies modify the laws after such cases and all the lawyers get paid, the regulators will re-define what they previously defined that led to the law of unintended consequences causing the conflict in the first place.

Indeed it is a cluster muck of biblical proportions much worse than the Spaghetti Bowl they call a freeway there. What happens to the 23-ye

aid, the regulators will re-define what they previously defined that led to the law of unintended consequences causing the conflict in the first place.

Indeed it is a cluster muck of biblical proportions much worse than the Spaghetti Bowl they call a freeway there. What happens to the 23-year old kids working in these regulatory agencies? Well, as they learn all this from the inside they do fine until they see what the real world is and leave for private practice. After all Franchising is about the market place, not imposed rules brought forth by bureaucrats at the request of stodgy old industry which cannot compete because they do not hustle, have no talent or simply have become lazy and out of shape and now they are not good enough to compete in changing business world. Here learn about franchising in your spare time if you must;

http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/franrulestaffrpt/OL-100001.pdf

Perhaps you will get a kick out of that because I sure enjoyed letting them have it for their abuse of power and ridiculous blob of bureaucracy in franchising. No business person should have to endure such a sham in my opinion, so perhaps you will consider all this in 2006.