Compare and contrast the two Franchise Agreements, Taste of Philly and Haagen Dazs, with respect to the contractual termination provisions.
Respond to each question using the number below, and post your answer as a separate paragraph in one initial post.
1. Under what specific circumstances could the Franchisor terminate the agreement after the franchise is operating based on the Taste of Philly Agreement? Cite the contract location(s)
2.Under what specific circumstances could the Franchisor terminate the agreement after the franchise is operating based on the Haagen Dazs agreement? Cite the contract location(s)
3.In general, not related to these two contracts, Why would a Franchisor not have a specific process and framework for terminating a Franchise? Is this a strategy or an oversight? Defend your position.
4.List 3 more specific reasons why a Franchise should be terminated and why you believe these to be true. You may not use reasons cited in the agreements above.
Taste of Philly. (2012, February 6). Franchise Agreement. Retrieved November 6, 2018, from https://www.tasteofphilly.biz/wp-content/uploads/TasteOfPhillySampleFranchiseAgreement.pdf
The HAAGEN-DAZS Shoppe Company, INC. (2007, March 26). Franchise Offering Circular. Retrieved November 6, 2018, from http://www.freefranchisedocs.com/haagen-dazs-UFOC….