FranchiseVerdict
Birdcall logo
B63/100FDD 2025

Birdcall — Litigation & Risk

Food & Beverage - Full Service · FDD Items 3, 4 & 5

Back to overview

Lower Risk

No litigation cases disclosed in FDD Items 3 and 4.

Source: FDD Items 3–5

FDD Items 3 & 4

Litigation Metrics

Cases disclosed
0
Total from FDD Items 3 and 4
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
—
Franchisor or officer bankruptcy
Overall risk score
63 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite
Rating
MODERATE
STRONG / MODERATE / CAUTION / AVOID

FDD Items 5, 6 & 17 — what you give up

Contract Risk Indicators

Mandatory arbitration
Not required
You retain the right to sue in court
Jury trial waiver
Waived
You give up the right to a jury trial
Non-compete
2 yrs
Post-termination restriction on similar businesses
Franchisor can compete
Yes
Franchisor can open competing locations in or near your territory
Right of first refusal
Yes
Franchisor can match any purchase offer when you try to sell
Governing law
Colorado
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there

What drove the 63/100 rating

Risk Score Breakdown

  1. 01MINOROnly 12 units system-wide with unknown/stagnant growth trajectory raises expansion viability concerns
  2. 02MEDNo Item 19 financial performance representation disclosed despite $2.4M max investment requirement
  3. 03MINORWide investment range ($702K-$2.4M) with $350K avg net income suggests inconsistent unit economics or high variability in performance
  4. 04HIGHGoing Concern status is FALSE — potential financial instability at franchisor level affects support infrastructure
  5. 05MINOR14.3% net margin (350K/2.44M) is modest for QSR with 6% royalty, leaving thin cushion for overhead and debt service on $702K-$2.4M SBA loans

Severity inferred from FDD text — not a regulatory or legal classification

Litigation data from FDD Items 3, 4, and 5. SBA data from public 7(a) FOIA records (FY2020–present). Not legal advice — consult a franchise attorney before signing any franchise agreement.