Subscribe
Previous Post
CUPPY’S RELOCATION LETTER – DALE NABORS
The embattled and controversial Cuppy’s Coffee franchise headquarters will be relocated from Fort Walton Beach, FL 350 miles north to Muscle Shoals, AL, home of its new parent company, FranSynergy.
The remaining staff of the Cuppy’s Coffee home office received the news in a letter from Dale “Believe & Succeed” Nabors who wrote:
“You may have heard we’ve been cleaning house; now we’re moving the house. After three months of evaluation, the Cuppy’s management team and I have determined that it is in the best interest, for the future success of our franchisees and the company, to relocate the corporate offices to Muscle Shoals, AL effective September 1.”
“Muscle Shoals is centrally located and it will serve to reduce operating costs and provide an abundant pool of resources and employees within the franchising industry.”
“Several of our current team members will be relocating and others will be assisting in the transition…”
“In closing, I’d like to reiterate my commitment, as well as the commitment of everyone at the home office, to helping you achieve a very bright and profitable future as a Cuppy’s franchisee. Believe & Succeed, Dale Nabors.”
Maybe some of our readers and Cuppy-philes can clear up a few questions:
- How does the now-unemployed staff members feel about their role in the “house cleaning”?
- “Muscle Shoals is centrally located…” to what? (One reader at Blue Mau Mau suggested the “National Possum-Stuffing Museum)
- Is it really sincere to reiterate”the commitment of everyone at the home office, to helping you achieve a very bright and profitable future” when only “several” of them will still be there in a month?
- What does this mean to the “depositer-franchisees” still owed money by Cuppy’s, Elite, and the sincere Dale Nabors? Well, one attorney and Cuppy’s-watcher emailed these thoughts:
If any of these folks are serious, they need to press this matter in litigation now. If assets are stripped, it will be much more costly to litigate this matter later… they would likely need to bring suit in Florida. If Nabors changes the state of incorporation to Alabama, I suspect these folks may have a harder time litigating in Alabama… certainly it will cut down on the number of prospective lawyers, since fewer are admitted to practice in Alabama and know Alabama law. Even with a federal court claim, many aspects are covered by state law.
WHAT DO YOU THINK? LEAVE A COMMENT BELOW.
__________________________
Visit FRANBEST’s: Unbiased franchise information, franchise interviews and detailed, searchable information on 400 franchise and business opportunities.
.
America’s Next Top Franchises.
Franchisees, customers & experts vote for their favorite new franchises at Top New Franchise: Who’s hot. Who’s not.
Franchising’s Worst-Case Scenarios:
Unhappy Franchisee: Franchising rumors, rants, controversies, issues, complaints & insider information you’re not supposed to know.
1086 days ago
[...] Comments) Does Cuppy’s Coffee or Elite Manufacturing Owe You Money? June 5, 2008 (100+ Comments) CUPPY’S COFFEE: Moving to Sweet Home Alabama August 4, 2008 (30+ Comments) CUPPY’S: CEO Dale Nabors Faces Felony Charges May 6, 2009 [...]
Looks like all the Cuppy’s websites are down and one of their domains just expired.
I remember back when Dale first came on as a consultant & mentioned he use to work for the Dwyer Group in Texas several years back. Some of the higher up managers at Medina were concerned about this new consultant coming on board & investigated/called Dwyer Group. Their comment was that they did remember Dale but that he NEVER AMOUNTED TO MUCH & WAS LET GO. That should have been a RED FLAG for Morg at the time. But I guess not. Dale has proven to be an absolute weasel & coward! He tells people such bull (this includes zees, s-employees, current employees, media) that I believe he truly believes his on crap! WHAT A JOKE THIS SO-CALLED MAN HAS PROVEN TO BE. I truly feel sorry for his family. WHEN A PERSON CAN NOT STAND UP AND ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE BITEN OFF MORE THAN THEY CAN CHEW & JUST LAY IT OUT FOR EVERYONE SO THEY CAN MAKE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS… PLUS THIS SAME PERSON CONTINUE TO TELL PEOPLE LIES SO THEY WILL SEND IN MORE MONEY… ALL I CAN SAY IS THIS PERSON IS THE BIGGEST COWARD I HAVE EVER KNOWN!!!! Even if Dale did this now, he has waited tooooooooooo long and most zees are bankrupt because of his delays and deceit. Again… What a coward!!!
Three new Cuppy’s Coffee interviews posted. The Herbers, Mirandas, Suarez & Schneider each entrusted Cuppy’s Coffee/Elite Manufacturing with significant sums of money. Each were promised repayment. Each received a token payment or two before the payments stopped and their calls were no longer taken or returned:
CUPPY’S COFFEE: Interview with Franchisee Mike Herber
CUPPY’S COFFEE: Interview with Franchise Owner Joshua Miranda
CUPPY’S COFFEE: Interview with Franchisee Daniel Suarez & Jaime Schneider
Read their stories. Share a comment. Spread the word.
Les Stewart of Franchise Fool thinks that litigation by franchisees against franchisors is like trying “to revive a corpse.” Sometimes, it is the second victimization of the franchisee who wants justice in the courts. Franchisees feel cheated, of course, because they buy franchises with no idea of the risk or the reward involved in the purchase because the risk or the reward of the investment is not required to be disclosed by the seller under the law.
Do attorneys tell their clients that the deck is stacked and that generally the franchise agreement packaged with the FDD protects the franchisor from charges of fraud and this was the whole idea of regulating franchising in the first place?
Just wondered!
Bingo.
I’ve hesitated telling Paul that he is being used… that I annoy him to keep the conversation going… adding up the comments… driving up search rankings… my shoulders sucking up the teardrops like sponges… all because I knew you boys would find a deep pocket eventually…
I hope someone will toss me a tuppence when all this is over, because my deep pockets have holes in them after all the hours I’ve spent on the Legend of Cuppies…
Sean is right about this. The organization of a group online, complete with legally relevant narratives, documents, may provide cheaper access to a legal, public relations, regulatory, criminal or some other type of solution.
Paul is right about this. At one point, the group has to decide whether to litigate or not. If such a point can never be reached and the franchisor knows it, then the franchisor can safely ignore the organization.
The trouble with hiring Zarco, Garner, or anyone who has little lawyers to feed is that a number of smaller groups cannot afford it.
But what Sean is doing may eventually have value because as a result of his group, a number of insiders have contacted both Paul and I. I dare say that we are in possession now of a considerable number of facts that that no law firm would have until after several tens of thousands of dollars had been spent.
In fact, today, I pretty sure that I have found a deep pocket to look at.
Just to be clear on this:
Mary Patrick bought in 2005
Robyn Rivera bought in 2005
Cryston Menz bought in 2006
The evil Bob Purvin, mastermind of this whole scam, gave “accredited contract” status to a new (and apparently never used, but that’s another story) contract announced on April 14, 2007 (and not actually offered till a few months after that).
In theory, quantum physics indicates that time may flow backward. So that is how it came to be that all the examples you cite are folks who purchased before Evil Bob had ever heard of Cuppy’s.
Wow, I never knew Purvin was that powerful!
Hey guys: follow the money. Morgan took it, and if anyone still has any of it, that would be a good place to start lookin’
Not to mention the first named Defendant ;)
Yes, you have just stated that they are doing nothing other than complaining on the internet.
That is pretty much the story of Java Joz/Cuppys since its inception:
1. Victims get sales pitch.
2. Victims wire money.
3. Victims wait patiently.
4. Victims complain.
5. Victims get sweet-talked.
6. Victims get wise.
7. Victims get mad.
8. Victims blog and blog and blog.
Well, now that will show the con artists! Take my money and I’ll say nasty things about how mean you are. I’ll even post on Ripoff Report! Take that! Now you have my money, but I’ll bet you feel real bad about it!
And we all see how Morgan got slammed on the internet, and it didn’t shut him down. Ditto Quizno’s and UPS stores.
Sean, you have shown both the uses and the limits of the Internet as a medium for stopping franchise fraud.
The fact is that there are limits, and we are at that point. So if folks want to do more than have a cyber pity-party, they should band together and litigate.
My understanding is that there are over 130 people in this boat. If they each did put “a couple thousand” in to the kitty, they would have a war chest of $260,000.
Collection of any judgment is another matter. But then, bitching on the Internet won’t do much either. Shutting down the bad guys and pressing for criminal prosecutions as warranted will actually accomplish something.
Morg took their money and apparently their balls as well.
So when these folks hire a Zarco or a Garner, let me know.
Till then…
…WAAHH, WAAHH, DADDY SEAN: THE MEAN MAN TOOK MY MONEY…WAAHH
I don’t know where you’re hearing all this whining.
Criston Menz wasn’t whining. She’s got an MBA, coffee experience and an HR job with a major corp. They allegedly defrauded her out of $40K.
Robyn Rivera wasn’t whining. Morg Morgan appears to be fueling his Jaguar with her $30K.
Mary Patrick isn’t whining. The company misrepresented itself and took 22 months to get her open, draining her cash, and she was closed in 8 mos.
Not one of them doesn’t regrets their decision to trust these bozos, and not one of them doesn’t feel stupid as hell. Not a single one of them doesn’t feel like they let their families down and put their futures in jeopardy.
They come forward to try to figure out what happened, what’s happening, and how they can get their money back.
They went to attorneys and spent a couple thousand just like the con artists knew they would. They don’t have enough money to wage a legal battle, just like the con artists knew they wouldn’t.
What’s your response? “Tough luck. You’re stupid. Go away.”
Who does that help?
I hand it to these guys for being here and making noise. The ones at the links above have courageously shared their stories… at their own risk.
Whiners? To the contrary. These are the people who are sending a message that the days of going away quietly are over. You want to scam franchisees… go ahead… but the whistle’s gonna sound loud and soon…
Sean, I don’t think that Purvin is nearly as important as you think he is.
Nor do I think that being a “member in good standing” of the Specialty Coffee Association, or being an International Franchise Assn Member, or having an AAFD accredited contract was a major factor in these people’s purchase decision.
I have a math question for you:
1. How many franchisees bought from Java Joz?
2. How many zees bought from Cuppys?
3. How many bought from Elite Manufacturing?
Now, of the total number of open and not opened and closed franchisees:
1. How many of those people purchased AFTER the AAFD “accreditation”?
2. How many signed the AAFD “accredited” contract?
As to the “depositors” I would note that while some come to cry on your sympathetic shoulder, many of them do not wish to be infantilized as you and others on this site would have them. Rather they seek to know their options and make a decision.
Indeed, you underestimate the franchisees. But worse is that you give prospective purchasers the idea that feelings and emotions are going to make any difference in either the franchise purchase or in any dispute resolution.
Newsflash here: these are serious business contracts with personal guarantees. Most states in the US are not California-style touchy-feely; you need to have a legally-cognizable claim and federal judges in particular don’t give a damn about how “unfair” life is.
Now, fraudulent conveyance and violation of escrow agreements, statutory violations, common-law fraud…. well, those might just be avenues worth discussing.
Worth discussing, that is, if you can stop your personal crusade against some guy in San Diego who by your own account is “increasingly irrelevant.”
As one example: you blame Purvin for not ascertaining that money was being placed in escrow. Get real. These people didn’t even give money to a franchisor, let alone an AAFD member. They gave it to a construction company!
Apparently most of them were willing to wire big bucks to a construction company but didn’t want to pay for an attorney. If they did have an attorney and the attorney didn’t address this matter, how do you expect Purvin to do so? Should Purvin have offered to be their attorney? This is like the BMM discussion about how attorneys should “step up” to fight for the poor depositor zees.
I have publicly disagreed with Purvin’s position on Cuppy’s. But I also am under no illusions as to why this mess came about, and it has little to no causal relationship to either Purvin or the AAFD.
Yes, to many of your readers the lesson is lost on them. The lesson is to quit whining. If you want to sue, then go ahead. If you want to file complaints with the regulatory authorities, then go ahead. Ditto with approaching the US Attorney’s office.
But to whine on blogs is at this point a waste of time. And to write to the Better Business Bureau or “Ripoff Report” was always a waste of time. If you are screwed, there are remedies available to you; either avail yourself of them or let it go and move on, this is a matter of personal choice and no internet pundit can make that decision for you.
With each passing day, I am more convinced that this whole company (in it’s various permutations and alter egos) was a giant scam masquerading as a franchise. I am also aware of the long trail on the Internet which should have raised suspicions and, as the securities litigators would say “bespeaks caution.”
One of the puzzles in this case is why so few of the “depositors” have come forward even on the Internet, or filed any complaints with regulators– let alone actually commenced litigation.
It would seem for whatever reason that those fleeced in this tale were indeed primarily composed of docile sheep. Whether that is due to the affirmative screening of Snowden/Morgan or due to some self-selection by the fleeced, I do not know.
Even so, out of 100++ people, you would think that there would have been at least a few with some balls and willingness to do more than borrow a Kleenex from Sean Kelly.
To quote an eminent Irishman: “Sometimes franchising is God’s way of telling you that you have too much money.”
Paul:
I’m flattered that you need to exaggerate and distort my points in order to attack them.
No, he’s not to blame for global warming. Never said that, just like I never voiced the simplistic good vs. bad FR naive viewpoint you assigned to me on BMM. I will try to make my actual arguments more assailable so you don’t strain yourself. :)
What I actually said was he’s to blame for helping perpetuate a fraud and doing grave damage to the credibility of a promising organization of his own founding.
He is not guilty of being evil or malicious, just lukewarm and increasingly irrelevant.
As for blaming the franchise “depositers” for their bad decisions, do you really think that after losing $30K-$40K and being jerked around for a year or more they really need an extra kick or two for making a bad decision?
I really don’t think the lesson is lost on them. And I think most of them, at this point, are thanking God that they didn’t get financing and get to that inner circle of hell as a full-fledged Cuppy’s Coffee franchisee.
Thanks, Paul, for recognizing that there is an IFA/FTC/SBA conspiracy, but you attorneys all talk around the real problem, in my opinion! The real problem is the failure of the regulators to require franchisors to disclose the financial unit performance statistics of their systems to new buyers. Obviously, this “failure” is premeditated to permit franchisors to sell their franchise products to new buyers without disclosing the true risk and rewards of the franchise purchase, as known to the franchisors.
If Richard Solomon is honest enough to indicate that he doesn’t think the AAFD can do anything really constructive for franchisees and Richard Solomon is honest enough to indicate that government regulation doesn’t protect franchisees, why are you jumping all over SEAN (and Richard Solomon) for pointing out that “Good Housekeeping Seals” are misleading and will be used to imply a recommendation to buy the franchise that gets the AAFD Seal or the Accreditation.
In your book “Beguiling Heresy” you indicate that you KNOW that franchisees are often naive and inexperienced and have no idea of the risk involved and are easily misled into the purchase of a franchise. Obviously, you wrote this excellent book to educate law students and to push for a fairer franchisor-franchisee relationship. But, have you, like Robert Purvin, just backed off of trying to get fairer franchise regulation and are you willing to settle for a fairer contract? Why are you jumping all over Sean for doing the right thing and telling the truth about the dishonesty of all of this?
You know that a few websites and the posts of cheated franchisees cannot overcome over thirty years of PR and hype in the Press and Media that presents franchising as a safe investment for a job and profits and “the American Dresm.” You know that most prospective franchisees approach franchising in good faith with NO IDEA of the danger to which they will be exposed. The constructive fraud of the package of the FTCRule/state FDD and the adhesory contract does the job it it intended to do.
My opinion! Just exactly where do you stand today, Paul Steinberg? What is your position? Sean stated his position clearly in this matter but your position is unclear. “If you can’t beat them, you join them?” —And, you blame the victims?
Carol
The FRANCHISEES “couldn’t take 5 minutes to see if funds were escrowed,” the FRANCHISEES didn’t give their money to the franchisor (they gave it to a construction company), the FRANCHISEES didn’t ask for paperwork.
But the franchisees are not responsible for anything.
Their lawyers are not responsible for anything.
Bob Purvin IS responsible for everything.
Between you and me, I hear that Bob is responsible for global warming and strife in the Middle East… and don’t get me started on his role in the Kennedy assasination.
Grow up. Tell your whiners to grow up. They are not infants. They wired money, not Purvin. They sent money to a construction company, not Purvin. They either signed (or did not sign) legally-binding agreements, not Purvin.
They listened to shills, allegedly paid by Morgan and/or Nabors–again, NOT Purvin. Oh, and those shills were themselves franchisees; my favorite posting was the one where the complicit franchisee admitted (from cover of anonymity, of course) to getting paid for false testimonials but justified the scam on the basis that they needed the money.
Long before Purvin ever heard of Cuppy’s, they were selling franchises. But then, I guess you are now going to blame Purvin for not giving Scoble his money back.
Your visceral dislike for Purvin is as clear as Purvin’s visceral aversion to criticizing whoever happens to be the current management of Cuppy’s.
And no doubt you and Richard Solomon would jump for joy and host a party if the AAFD folded its tent.
The next day, you’d have to find a new bogey-man. The difference is that Solomon would simply tell people to spend wads of money to litigate, while you would just blog in righteous anger; frankly I suspect either approach would have about the same practical impact.
God forbid you actually have enough respect for franchisees to assume they are adults responsible for their own actions.
As you point out, there was a wealth of information out there sufficient to raise huge warning flags.
And you would have us believe that All-Powerful Purvin has such stature that no body would believe the voluminous internet blogs if Purvin just blinded them with reflections from his polished pate.
Well, people are buying Quizno’s and UPS store franchises every day. People were buying Famous Uncle Al’s hot dog franchises when public filings showed they had $960 in the bank. People pay $30,000 for the “right” to pick up dog crap.
Oh, that’s all Purvin’s fault too. We used to blame the IFA/FTC/SBA conspiracy, but now we know better.
I disagree with Purvin. But he is not the problem here.
Sure he is, Paul. As are all the people who pat him on the head because he’s a nice old guy. He gave Morg Morgan the badge of credibility he needed to scam 9 more months of prospects, to explain away all the warnings you, I and others put out there. He praised them, gave them a trophy and didn’t even check to see if they had stopped spending money entrusted to them for safekeeping.
Everyone who signed up from April 2007 thought they were signing up with this award-winning franchise organization with the highest rating ever bestowed by the man who wrote the book on Franchise Fraud. And he couldn’t take 5 minutes to see if funds were escrowed? Or if his precious contract was being used? Or if it was even being GIVEN to prospects?
I think it’s unconscionable. He is probably the most trusted guy in the industry, and for him to continue to support the fraud he helped to perpetrate is, to me, really depressing. This is the guy with the white hat in the industry… the best we’ve got?
You might be so jaded – and maybe you have to be in your business – to deride and criticize the “depositers,” but these are not stupid people in denial and looking for someone to blame. They are victims of a massive con game where franchisees are paid for nice testimonials, and seemingly credible organizations are paid to give bogus awards, and magazines praise and glorify any company willing to buy an ad. They may have been naive, but it was a carefully nurtured and manufactured naivete.
Sean, you are correct about Purvin and the FTC/SBA/Attys General, etc.
It is not the responsibility of the aggrieved parties to contact those agencies. Rather, it is the responsibility of Purvin, acting in loco parentis, to protect these gullible rubes who give franchise fees to a construction company.
Purvin was (and is) wrong. Fine. Get over it.
I disagree with Purvin. But he is not the problem here. You have a bunch of willfully-ignorant people who got scammed by a Ponzi scheme wherein the new “depositor” monies were used to stave off complaints from old “depositors.”
Now the chickens have come home to roost, as we all suspected they would.
And even now, how many of those 130+ people participated in the conference call? How many of the existing franchisees have banded together to protect their own interests?
Webster brings up a legitimate point for discussion. It is a discussion potentially leading to a wider lesson.
But no… let’s not do that. Lets just whack Purvin again.
It’s a tiresome game, but we’re too intellectually lazy to do anything but rant.
…hey, let’s get the Ranter onboard! Now that is sure to lead to cogent insights on franchising!
I agree with Sean! How can Robert Purvin and Michael Webster defend trying to stand in the middle (as neutral parties) between the franchisor and the franchisee when the legal relationship and contract is one-sided in almost complete FAVOR of the franchisor.
There is NO middle in which to stand. Sean Kelly tells the truth and allows the truth to be told on Franchise Pick. And, why criticize, Sean, the marketing guy with a blog, who first pointed out that Cuppy’s was using their “fair contract accreditation” from the AAFD to sell franchises on the Internet, and was not returning deposits to those prospects who couldn’t obtain financing? Sean performed a public service in airing this failure and in permitting the prospective franchisees and the current franchisees to post their complaints. He gave them a voice that in the past would have been ignored or silenced. He also pointed out that fair contract accreditations and SEALS etc… would be misleading to new buyers who would interpret these “awards” as a recommendation to buy the franchise.
But, all attorneys learn in law school that “franchising” is treated as “special” under the law and that the “balance of power” has been given to the franchisor under law because it is franchisors who feeds the economy and government job numbers by attempting to grow their businesses and profits as franchised systems instead of independent chain systems.
Under regulation, franchisors are given a blank check in which to attempt to grow chain organizations in the economy. They are encouraged to multiply and grow and franchisees are merely a resource for their growth.
Of course, franchisors understand that they generally are protected from charges of fraud as long as they appear to be trying and they often, as needed, write their blank checks for as much as they have in the bank, and often the money in the bank is the good faith money received from prospective franchisees — as with Cuppy’s.
What is the definition of a legitimate franchisor under the law? The FTC Rule and the State UFOC/FDD does not ensure that prospective buyers of franchises are dealing with “legitimate” franchisors. Why aren’t prospective buyers permitted to look at the unit financial performance statistics of franchise systems to determine whether or not the return on the investment in the franchise has good odds of justifying the risk?
Maybe the Internet and sites like Franchise Pick will be the wrecking ball and the bulldozer who will force changes in the status quo of franchising, as practiced today under the law.
I hope so!
Carol
What you should be focusing on is why the initial deposits were not in escrow, as demanded by the regulators.
Remind me why should I should be focusing on this? What non-profit fair franchising organization do I run?
What should Bob Purvin be focusing on? Asking franchisees to scrape together their lunch money to start a franchisee organization?
Where is the FTC? The SBA? The Attorney Generals? Not a peep. Lives are being ruined, houses lost, reputations devastated, and Purvin can’t pick up the phone or drop it into a conversation when he’s giving these guys awards for how fair franchising has become?
In fact, his defense of Cuppy’s Coffee has probably assured some of them they don’t need to address it.
All of this and the responsibility falls to a marketing guy with a blog?
I’m sick of all this softpedalling. The fact that the AAFD defends this silence as prudent and allows Purvin to hide in denial just shows that this system can’t be improved with meetings and reports. It needs a wrecking ball and a bulldozer.
Sean writes: “while he debates for a year whether taking someone’s money then not giving it back is unfair.”
That is nonsense Sean, and you know it. Cuppy’s disputes that for a number of deposits the requisite conditions for repayment have been met.
What you should be focusing on is why the initial deposits were not in escrow, as demanded by the regulators.
Thanks for the compliments.
I don’t doubt that Mr. Purvin means well, but I question most of the premises he operates on. For instance, keeping a foot in each camp is plain silly. Funny that a lawyer would not have an appreciation for the adversarial system that the court system is built on.
Franchisees need an advocate, not someone pretending to be in the middle. That’s like having a trial with a judge and either a prosecutor or defense attorney, but not both. As you said, the balance of power is with the franchisor. They’ve got lawyers, they drafted the documents, they’ve got jurisdiction. Franchisees need someone to represent their interests and push for fairness with the hope that they can reach a compromise in the middle and move on.
Purvin thinks that he can be the center, but there is no center because one side lacks an advocate. What he calls “mediation” is simply passing the franchisor’s offer on to the franchisee without comment. His comments about “getting all the facts before making a decision” is preposterous… because he allows an award to be used to perpetuate fraud while he debates for a year whether taking someone’s money then not giving it back is unfair.