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
65 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite
Rating
MODERATE
STRONG / MODERATE / CAUTION / AVOID
FDD Items 5, 6 & 17 — what you give up
Contract Risk Indicators
Mandatory arbitration
Required
Disputes resolved outside court — limits your legal options
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
Utah
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there
What drove the 65/100 rating
Risk Score Breakdown
- 01MEDZero disclosed franchise units with unknown growth trajectory indicates either brand-new concept or undisclosed closures/struggles
- 02MEDNo average revenue or net income disclosure (missing Item 19) prevents ROI validation and suggests franchisor may lack performance data or wants to avoid liability
- 03MINORUnprotected territory creates direct competition risk—multiple franchisees could operate in same area, cannibalizing sales
- 04MINORWide investment range ($144K–$1.28M) without corresponding revenue disclosure makes due diligence nearly impossible
- 05MINORHigh royalty floor (6% of gross sales, non-negotiable) leaves thin margins in a capital-intensive golf entertainment business
- 06MINOR10-year term locks franchisees into long commitment with no performance benchmarks or escape clauses
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.