Blimpie Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026
- Investment
- $254K – $589K
- Disclosed sales
- not disclosed
- SBA charge-off
- 30.0%
- on 659 loans
Data from FDD filing + SBA 7(a) records
Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology
Blimpie is a quick-service franchise serving made-to-order deli-style submarine sandwiches. Franchisees run shops managing food prep, counter service, and staffing.
FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026
A Blimpie franchise requires a total initial investment of $254K – $589K, including a $7K – $18K franchise fee and an ongoing 6.0% royalty[2]. This franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that. SBA 7(a) loans show a 30.0% charge-off rate across 659 loans[1]. FranchiseVerdict grade: D (Below average), an editorial assessment, not investment advice. Run a live ROI scan →
Sources, dates and evidence
FDD issued: · Data extracted: · Last cited check: · Staleness risk: medium - issued 12 to 24 months ago; a newer filing is likely on file
Evidence: strong✓ Investment (Item 7)✓ Item 19 status✓ Units and owners (Item 20)✓ SBA loan coverage✓ Litigation (Item 3)✓ Financial statements (Item 21)✓ Franchisor identityhow this is scored5 of 5 headline figures on this page cite a page of the filing.
Overview
- Investment
- $254K – $589K
- 38th pct Service Resta…
- Avg gross sales
- N/A
- Royalty
- 6.0%
- 48th pct Service Resta…
- Units
- 101
- 76th pct Service Resta…
- SBA charge-off
- 30.0%
- % of SBA 7(a) loans not repaid · median varies by category
Quick verdict · Quick-Service Restaurants · color = vs category peers
Green = favorable by >10% vs Quick-Service Restaurants median · No shading = within ±10% · Red = unfavorable by >10% · Source: FDD filings + SBA 7(a)
Data from public FDD filings and SBA records. Not financial advice. Methodology
Bottom line
- COSTTotal investment $254K – $589K including a $18K franchise fee, 6.0% ongoing royalty.
- RETURNSThis franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that.
- RISKVerdict D (Below average), verdict score 31/100 (higher is better). SBA loan charge-off rate of 30.0% across 659 loans (well above the 16% franchise average, based on all SBA 7(a) franchise lending, 2010–2025).
- GROWTHNegative: net -7 franchised outlets in the latest year (1 opened, 8 closed); 12 signed but not yet open (Item 20).
- LEGAL20 litigation matters disclosed in Item 3, higher than typical. Review the summary for patterns (franchisor-initiated vs. franchisee-initiated).
Item 1 · who you're contracting with
The Franchisor
Corporate structure & franchisor financials
- Legal entity
- Kahala Franchising, L.L.C.
- Parent company
- MTY Franchising USA, Inc.
- FDD Item 1, page 7 of the 2025 FDD
- Ultimate parent
- MTY Food Group, Inc.
- FDD Item 1, page 7 of the 2025 FDD
- Predecessor
- Kahala Franchise Corp. / Blimpie International, Inc.
- Prior franchisor entity
- CEO title
- Chief Executive Officer (MTY)
- Eric Lefebvre
- CEO experience
- 2018 yrs
- Years in role or industry
- Incorporated in
- AZ
- HQ
- 9311 E. Via De Ventura, Scottsdale, Arizona 85258
- Auditor
- PwC (PricewaterhouseCoopers)
- Audited financials
- Franchisor revenue
- $580.3M
- vs $263.7M prior year
- Management churn noted
- Frequent turnover
- Item 2 disclosed frequent executive changes
Same owner · FDD Item 1, page 7
26 other brands on this site name MTY Food Group, Inc. as parent or ultimate parent in their own FDD.
- Barrio QueenC
- Chicken Strips and DipsD
- Cold Stone CreameryC
- Extreme PitaF
- Famous Dave’sB
- Ginger Sushi + Poke ShopC
- GrabbagreenC
- Great SteakC
- Kahala Coffee TradersB
- La DiperieB
- Manchu WOKB
- Maui WowiD
- Mucho BurritoB
- NrGize Lifestyle CafeB
- Papa Murphy'sA
- PinkberryB
- Planet SmoothieC
- Samurai Sam’s Teriyaki GrillB
- Sauce Pizza / WineD
- Surf City SqueezeD
- TacoTimeC
- Thai ExpressD
- Village InnD
- Wetzel’s PretzelsA
- +2 more
Portfolio: MTY Food Group
Grouped by the owner's name as each filing prints it (this page: the 2025 FDD). Spelling variants of the same group may be listed apart; a brand is never grouped with an owner its filing does not name.
Overview
About
- CEO
- Eric Lefebvre
- Headquarters
- AZ
- FDD year
- 2025
- States available
- 24
Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?
Entry cost runs 13% below the typical quick-service restaurants franchise.
Source: FDD 2025 · Items 5–7
Full Item 7 breakdown17 line items
Initial investment breakdown
| Line item | Low | High | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial Franchise Fee (Traditional) | $10K | $18K | |
| Rent/Security Deposit (three months) (Traditional) | $3K | $15K | |
| Travel and Living Expenses during Training (Traditional) | $3K | $8K | |
| Real Estate (Traditional) | — | — | |
| Lease Review Fee (Traditional) | $0 | $3K | |
| Architectural Fees (Traditional) | $10K | $20K | |
| Construction Costs / Leasehold Improvements (Traditional) | $100K | $312K | |
| Restaurant Equipment, Furniture, Small Wares, Menu Boards and Interior Signage (Traditional) | $80K | $128K | |
| Exterior Signage (Traditional) | $8K | $17K | |
| Computer Hardware, Software (POS System) (Traditional) | $3K | $5K | |
| PCI Compliance Costs (Traditional) | $0 | $1K | |
| Opening Inventory (food and paper) (Traditional) | $4K | $6K | |
| Grand Opening Marketing Fee (Traditional) | $10K | $10K | |
| Business Insurance (Traditional) | $1K | $5K | |
| Miscellaneous Opening Costs (Traditional) | $5K | $19K | |
| Depository Account (Traditional) | $3K | $3K | |
| Additional Funds - 3 month initial period (Traditional) | $15K | $20K | |
| Total initial investment | $254K | $589K |
Line items extracted from FDD Item 7. Ranges reflect the franchisor's stated low and high per line. Total is the sum of line-item lows / highs — actual costs may fall outside this range depending on market and build-out scope.
Item 7 · what it costs to open + operate
The Vitals
- Total investment
- $254K – $589K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Liquid capital req'd
- $15K – $20K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Franchise fee
- $7K – $18K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Royalty
- 6.0%
- Set by a formula · typical 6–8%
- Ad fund
- 4.0%
- typical 3–5%
- Total fee load
- 10.0%
- vs 9–13% typical
Ongoing fees · Item 6
| Fee | Amount |
|---|---|
| Royalty | 6.0% of gross sales |
| Marketing / ad fund | 4.0% of gross sales |
| Technology fee | $75 |
| Training fee | $1K |
| Transfer fee | $5K |
| Renewal fee | $9K |
| Inventory (initial) | $4K – $6K |
| Total fee load | 10.0% of rev |
ROI & LBO modelsSingle-unit · 25-unit portfolio · editable
Blimpie makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD - a voluntary item under the FTC Franchise Rule - so no unit revenue figures are disclosed. The return models need a revenue figure to start from, and the operating costs that turn gross sales into a profit are in no FDD. Enter your own and the calculator runs on your assumptions — nothing here is modelled until you do.
Returns model · single-unit ROIC
What would one Blimpie unit return on the cash you put in?
Illustrative category typicals — not sourced to any filing, survey or sample. Replace them with figures from franchisee validation calls before you rely on the output.
Unlevered ROIC · per unit
Your modelled return on total invested capital, before any debt financing.
—
An FDD discloses gross sales, not profit. We hold no sourced figure for annual revenue, COGS, labour, rent / occupancy and other operating costs, and will not substitute an assumed one. Enter your own and the model runs on your assumptions.
These models are for research and scenario planning only. Not investment advice. Actual results depend on your specific location, management, and market conditions. Consult a franchise attorney and accountant before signing any franchise agreement.
Item 19 · Source: 2025 FDD
Financial Performance
No financial performance representation
This franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that.
Item 20 of the FDD lists current and former franchisees; asking them directly is the standard way to fill this gap.
Operator outlook
What the numbers say
Data-driven interpretation of this brand's financial disclosures, fee structure, and system trajectory.
Fee burden
Total ongoing fee load of 10.0% — above the Quick-Service Restaurants median of 7.5%.
Disclosure
This franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that. Item 20 of the FDD lists current and former franchisees; asking them directly is the standard way to fill this gap.
Operator retention
System contracting at -14.9% CAGR over 3 years. Investigate whether closures are franchisor-driven consolidation or franchisee exits.
Source: FDD Item 19 financial performance representations and publicly filed FDD data. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Verify all figures with the franchisor and current franchisees before making any investment decision.
vs Quick-Service Restaurants medians
How Blimpie Compares
Category median of published Quick-Service Restaurants brands that report the figure; the middle half spans the 25th to 75th percentile and n counts the brands behind it. Medians are used because a few very large systems pull an average far from the typical brand. Revenue is disclosed gross sales, not profit.
Is the system healthy?
Source: FDD 2025 · Item 20
Unit growth
Item 20 · unit dynamics
The Growth Chart
- Total units
- 101
- Opened
- 1
- Last reporting year
- Closed
- 8
- Terminated
- 0
- Franchisor ended the franchise (per Item 20)
- Non-renewed
- 4
- Term expired, not renewed (per Item 20)
- Turnover rate
- 7.9%
- Company-owned
- 4
- Corporate units in the system
- % franchised
- 96%
- vs corporate-owned
- Net growth (3-yr)
- -14.9%
- Net unit change over 3 years
- 3-yr CAGR
- -14.9%
- Compounded over last 3 years
Last fiscal year · Item 20 exits and transfers
- Terminated
- 0
- Not renewed
- 4
- Signed, not yet open
- 12
- 0.12 per open outlet · Item 20 Table 5
- Projected new
- 4
- Franchisor's next-year forecast
- Transfer rate
- 4.9%
- Owners selling to other franchisees
- Termination rate
- 7.9%
- Franchisor-initiated terminations
- Ceased ops
- 3.0%
- Units that stopped operating
Year-over-year franchised unit counts and net change. Source: FDD Item 20.
Item 20 · 18 states with active franchisees
The Territory Map
Derived from franchisee contact records. Shows states with at least one current operator. Not where the franchisor is registered to sell new units (that data is re-extracting in a future refresh).
States derived from franchisee contact records (FDD Item 20). Shows states with at least one current operator on file. Full state registration data (Item 12) will appear on a future FDD refresh.
Where the owners are · Item 20 owner list
85 current owners across 18 states.
- NJ 25
- GA 16
- NY 9
- MI 7
- ID 6
- CA 5
- IA 3
- IN 3
- TX 2
- CT 1
- FL 1
- IL 1
- +6 more states
Counts only, from the list the franchisor prints in Item 20. Names and phone numbers are for your own due diligence and are not shown here.
A system losing more than 10% of its units year-over-year is a red flag. Check whether closures are concentrated in specific regions.
SBA loan performance
Government records
SBA Loan Data
Aggregated from SBA 7(a) and 504 loan disclosures, public data unique to FranchiseVerdict.
- Total loans
- 659
- Loan volume
- $92.8M
- Median loan
- $90K
- 50th percentile
- Charge-off rate
- 30.0%
- on 659 loans · rates vary by category · see methodology
Historical SBA 7(a) lending data, not predictive of future performance. How SBA charge-off rates are calculated
- Repayment rate (PIF)
- 69.3%
- 5-yr charge-off
- N/A
- Loans approved 2021+
- Active lenders
- 183
- Defaults
- 160
- Typical loan rate
- 5.8%
- avg rate to borrowers
- Franchised industry avg
- 21.5%
- brand above franchise avg ↑
- Jobs supported
- 1,085
- 1.6 per loan
- Lender concentration
- 7%
- top lender's share
Franchise vs independent — in limited-service restaurants, franchised businesses charge off at 21.5% vs 25.0% for independents — franchising is associated with 14% lower SBA default risk in this category.
Vintage analysis
Blimpie charge-off rate by loan vintage
Shaded area: recent vintages with few resolved loans; rates may change as loans mature.
Top lenders financing Blimpie franchisees
Showing 3 of 183 lenders. The full breakdown — every lender, state distribution, interest rates & risk ratings — is in the SBA Lending Report below.
Explore lender portfolios on Bank Reports or regional data on State Reports.
Lender network · 7(a) + 504
SBA Lending Report
Full lending analysis for Blimpie from SBA 7(a) FOIA data.
- Principal loss rate
- 23.5%
- Avg SBA guarantee
- 79%
- Avg interest rate
- 5.80%
- Avg chargeoff amount
- $103K
- Lender concentration
- 7.4%
- Job velocity
- 1.6 per $100K
- NAICS benchmark
- 15.7%
- NAICS 722211
- Jobs supported
- 1,085
Top SBA lendersTop lender holds 7% of loans
| # | Lender | Loans | Volume | Default % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Readycap Lending, LLC | 39 | $5.9M | 43.6% |
| 2 | Wells Fargo Bank National Association | 37 | $5.5M | 35.1% |
| 3 | Bank of America, National Association | 32 | $2.5M | 22.6% |
| 4 | The Huntington National Bank | 22 | $3.3M | 31.8% |
| 5 | PNC Bank, National Association | 21 | $4.0M | 28.6% |
| 6 | JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association | 17 | $2.4M | 64.7% |
| 7 | KeyBank National Association | 14 | $1.4M | 21.4% |
| 8 | U.S. Bank, National Association | 12 | $1.1M | 16.7% |
| 9 | First Interstate Bank | 11 | $1.2M | 9.1% |
| 10 | Truist Bank | 10 | $690K | 10.0% |
Geographic failure vector
| State | Loans | Defaults | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| TXTexas | 52 | 26 | 50.0% |
| CACalifornia | 44 | 13 | 29.5% |
| GAGeorgia | 43 | 9 | 21.4% |
| NJNew Jersey | 28 | 5 | 17.9% |
| INIndiana | 27 | 12 | 44.4% |
| IAIowa | 21 | 9 | 42.9% |
| MIMichigan | 21 | 7 | 33.3% |
| OHOhio | 21 | 9 | 45.0% |
| MOMissouri | 18 | 4 | 23.5% |
| CTConnecticut | 17 | 6 | 35.3% |
SBA 7(a) lending trend
Source: SBA 7(a) + 504 FOIA loan-level data, matched by FranchiseVerdict
A 30.0% charge-off rate means roughly 1 in 3 franchisees failed to repay their SBA loan. Investigate what changed.
What could kill this investment?
SBA loans charge off at 30.0% — 87% above the 16.0% national norm, i.e. higher lender-observed risk.
Source: SBA 7(a) FOIA · FDD Items 3, 21
Risk analysis
FranchiseVerdict rating + FDD Items 3, 4, 8, 16, 21
Risk & Legal
Blimpie presents high risk: a contracting system (-6.7% YoY) with undisclosed financials, active litigation across parent company MTY USA, no territory protection, and heavy royalty obligations on a declining brand—characteristics typical of franchises in distress.
Litigation (Item 3)
Subject: the franchisor is a named party (defendant).
Two concluded litigation matters disclosed: (1) Purav Enterprises, L.L.C., Balwant Bahia, and Paramjit Samra v. The Extreme Pita Franchising USA, Inc., et al. (King County, WA Superior Court, Case No. 15-2-15120-7) - filed June 22, 2015, alleging FIPA violations and misrepresentation; settled March 11, 2016 for $20,000; dismissed March 16, 2016. (2) KOHO, Inc. v. Kahala Franchising, L.L.C. (Los Angeles County, CA Superior Court, Case No. BC572565) - filed February 17, 2015, alleging breach of contract and unjust enrichment; cross-complaint filed by Kahala; bench trial June 15-16, 2016; Kahala awarded judgment and $205,000 in attorneys' fees; settled June 19, 2017 for $75,000 plus forgiveness of $130,000 in damages.
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None disclosed
Audited financials (Item 21)
Yes · PwC (PricewaterhouseCoopers)
Franchisor revenue (Item 21)
Franchisor entity revenue (not unit-level)
Audited consolidated financials are for the Franchisor's parent/guarantor MTY Franchising USA, Inc. and subsidiaries (not Blimpie/Kahala Franchising standalone), fiscal years ended November 30, 2023 and 2022, in thousands of US dollars. Total revenue FY2023 = $580,280K (Franchising $242,343K + Corporate $337,937K). Net income FY2023 = $16,978K. Auditor signed in Montreal, Canada (CPA permit No. A 125677); firm name not printed in the extracted exhibit.
ⓘ These are the parent company's consolidated financials (the parent guarantees the franchisor), not this brand's standalone results — the figure reflects the whole corporate group, not this brand alone.
Supplier relationship · Items 8 & 16
- Franchisor sells you products: Yes
- Kickbacks from required suppliers: Yes
- Must buy proprietary products: Yes
- Restricted to system-approved products: Yes
- Can negotiate own supplier terms: No
Score breakdown · what drove the 31 / 100 verdict
- 01MINORDeclining unit count (-6.7% YoY with only 101 locations) suggests system contraction and weak franchisee retention
- 02MEDNo average revenue or net income disclosure (missing Item 19) prevents financial viability assessment and indicates potential franchisor concern
- 03HIGHMultiple active litigation cases involving breach of contract, misrepresentation, and FIPA violations across MTY USA portfolio suggest systemic compliance and integrity issues
- 04MINORHigh royalty burden with $300/week minimum ($15,600 annually) plus 6% of gross sales creates significant fixed costs on declining brand
- 05MINORUnprotected territory means franchisees face direct competition from other Blimpie franchisees with no geographic exclusivity
- 06MINOR10-year term is lengthy given system's deterioration trajectory and lack of performance transparency
Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification
What are you signing up for?
Ongoing fees run about 10.0% of sales (royalty + ad fund), before rent and labor.
Source: FDD 2025 · Items 11, 12, 17
FDD Items 12, 15, 17 · continued from Risk & Legal
Contract & Territory Detail
| Initial term | 10 years |
|---|---|
| Renewal term | 5 years |
| Allowed renewalsℹ | 1 |
| Territory type | No territory protection |
| Protected territory | No |
| Exclusive territoryℹ | No |
| Online sales rightsℹ | Granted |
| Franchisor can compete | Yes |
| Hire a manager? | Allowed |
| Owner-operator | Optional |
| Non-compete (years)ℹ | 2 years |
| Non-compete (miles)ℹ | 10 mi |
| Right of first refusalℹ | Yes |
| Transfer requires consent | Yes |
| Termination notice | 14 days |
| Mandatory arbitration | Yes |
| Arbitration location | County/state where Franchised Business is located |
| Jury trial waiver | Yes |
| Governing law | State where Franchised Business is located |
| Litigation count | 20 |
View Item 3 litigation summary
Two concluded litigation matters disclosed: (1) Purav Enterprises, L.L.C., Balwant Bahia, and Paramjit Samra v. The Extreme Pita Franchising USA, Inc., et al. (King County, WA Superior Court, Case No. 15-2-15120-7) - filed June 22, 2015, alleging FIPA violations and misrepresentation; settled March 11, 2016 for $20,000; dismissed March 16, 2016. (2) KOHO, Inc. v. Kahala Franchising, L.L.C. (Los Angeles County, CA Superior Court, Case No. BC572565) - filed February 17, 2015, alleging breach of contract and unjust enrichment; cross-complaint filed by Kahala; bench trial June 15-16, 2016; Kahala awarded judgment and $205,000 in attorneys' fees; settled June 19, 2017 for $75,000 plus forgiveness of $130,000 in damages.
Items 10, 11
Training & Operations
- Classroom training
- 40 hrs
- On-the-job training
- 60 hrs
- Training location
- Scottsdale, AZ (KTEC / online for classroom); training store in Arizona for OJT
- Ongoing training
- Optional
- Field support
- 60 hrs/yr
- On-site visits per year
- Time to open
- 7 mo
- From signing to launch
- Site selection
- Franchisee selects, franchisor must approve
- Franchisor financing
- Offered
- Item 10
Items 5 & 11
Franchisor Support
Item 20 · call current owners
Franchisee Contacts
85 owners to call
Name · phone · city · state. Extracted from FDD Item 20
Frequently asked questions
Frequently Asked Questions
How much does it cost to open a Blimpie franchise?
The total investment to open a Blimpie franchise ranges from $254K – $589K, with an initial franchise fee of $18K. This includes real estate, equipment, inventory, and working capital as disclosed in their Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD).
What do Blimpie franchise owners earn?
Blimpie makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD - a voluntary item under the FTC Franchise Rule - so no unit revenue figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that. Item 20 of the FDD lists current and former franchisees; asking them directly is the standard way to fill this gap.
Who owns Blimpie?
Blimpie is franchised by Kahala Franchising, L.L.C.. Its parent company is MTY Franchising USA, Inc.. The ultimate parent named in the FDD is MTY Food Group, Inc.. Source: FDD Item 1, 2025 filing.
What is Item 19 in the Blimpie FDD?
The FDD section where a franchisor may disclose financial performance of its outlets. Disclosure is optional and formats vary; figures are typically gross sales, which is revenue before expenses, not profit. FranchiseVerdict extracts these figures directly from the Blimpie FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.
What is Blimpie's franchise failure rate?
Based on SBA 7(a) loan data, Blimpie has a charge-off rate of 30.0% across 659 loans, meaning 30.0% of franchise loans were charged off. Charge-off rates are one proxy for franchise risk, though they do not capture all closures. This data comes from FOIA-sourced SBA lending records.
How many Blimpie franchise locations are there?
As of their most recent FDD filing, Blimpie has 101 total units in the United States, including 97 franchised units and 4 company-owned units. 1 new units were opened in the latest reporting year.
Is Blimpie a good franchise to buy?
FranchiseVerdict rates Blimpie as a D-grade franchise with a verdict score of 31 out of 100 (higher is better). The grade is a deterministic score built from six weighted dimensions — financial health, unit economics, unit growth, scale, legal, and transparency — then calibrated against SBA loan charge-off rates and FDD age. Transparency is one of the six, so a filing that discloses less scores lower on that dimension than one that discloses more. Our rating is based solely on publicly available FDD and government data; we recommend speaking with current franchisees before making any investment decision. This is not investment advice.
Data sourced from public FDD filings and SBA 7(a) FOIA records. Not financial advice.
For franchisors
Are you the franchisor?
If you represent Blimpie, you can request corrections or provide updated information.
Other Quick-Service Restaurants franchises
Compare similar franchise opportunities in the Quick-Service Restaurants category
Data extracted from public FDD filings and SBA 7(a) loan disclosures (FOIA). This information is provided for research purposes only and does not constitute financial, legal, or investment advice. Verify all figures with the franchisor's current Franchise Disclosure Document before making any investment decision.