Image by Getty Images via Daylife
I have written before about Children's Orchard, a franchise system with decidedly mixed success.
Now, Unhappy Franchisee reports that
"Children's Orchard is a chain of franchised resale shops that buy and sell children's clothing, furniture, and toys.
It was founded in 1980 and, in 2004, was acquired by current CEO Taylor Bond and a group of investors."
Having failed to engage the new owner of their franchise company CEO in meaningful dialogue and negotiation, the unhappy franchisees of the Children's Orchard franchise chain have taken to the Internet and the court of public opinion.
Yesterday, independent franchisee association The Orchard Cooperative (TOC) launched The Orchard Cooperative website.
One of the most professionally produced franchisee websites on the 'Net, the TOC website is organized into About Us, Smart Buying, CEO Record, franchise performance, franchise agreement, and competitor agreements."
This is always a tough topic: when should the independent franchisee association, IndFA, come out against the managers of the brand?
On one hand, the IndFA wants consumers to value the brand, but on the other hand the association has a duty to speak out against actions by CEO of franchisor when the CEO is no longer providing value to the brand.
What makes the The Orchard Cooperative website stand out, in part, is their analysis of their franchise agreement as compared with the competitors, Kid to Kid and Once Upon a Child.
Reading the comparisons sure makes the point that Children's Orchard is more expensive to own than either Kid to Kid or Once Upon a Child, I very much applaud this move to be more transparent.
Now, I do have some concerns about the viability of a website and association who have no other goal but to gripe about their contractual conditions; IndFA's have to do more to be viable.
Even the much maligned Toasted Sub, a website devoted to criticizing Quiznos, has some corporate sponsors on the front page!
This will be a story I will follow with interest.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=605caf7a-e0e4-462b-b236-203180e2289c)
Gentlemen: It's one thing to observe and read about a situation, and another to experience it first hand. Just because a person owns a franchise company, and is a franchisor, does not by any stretch of the imagination give credibility to his or her business acumen. Ask those of us who have tried our very best to reach across the conference table, and find compromise with this franchisor. If kindness and civility hasn't brought him to the table, then nothing else stands a chance.
Sean;
The reporting about Bond's prior history is important information for any prospective franchisee.
The reports appears to factual, and Mr. Bond can respond with clarifications if required.
Nobody is going to automatically think Mr. Bond is a failed business person, just because of a few hiccups in his business past.
Michael:
I am also watching this story with interest and posted on it here:
http://www.bizzia.com/franchisepick/childrens-orchard-new-site-exposes-blight/ as well.
I'm sure they have the attention of the home office at this point, though I wonder if the reaction will be, like the Quiznos Toasted Subs reaction, legal in nature.
One of my concerns is that they have certainly put Bond in a tough position. The section on his background must have sent his blood pressure thru the roof. Might be even tougher to get him to cooperate at this point, but maybe they had nothing to lose.
Should be interesting.