According to business venture policies and regulation controls, Alympia argues that a “franchiser gets $500 for selling the trademark rights” proposing the adaption a franchisor (context and meaning of franchise and franchisor) business model.
However, my argument makes logical sense as I considered regulatory policies stating that a franchisee should acquire trade dress and agree to trade certain product volumes for a specified duration – 10 years, for example. However, one major difference between Alympia’s and my arguments is the use and meaning of the term franchise. Comparing the use of the term franchise in both shows that the term is misused in one instance, Alympia’s. Alympia’s argument shows that she recommends Shania to open a franchisor company so that she can sell trading rights to other businesses. However, Alympia argues that “Permitting her company to become a franchise will enable every other business to pay for using her trademark” – an indication that the term is misused. On the other hand, I consider a franchise to be a business model that buys trademark rights from a master franchisor. This shows that Shania will be required to adhere to the control, mission, and vision approaches of a master franchisor if she chooses to adapt a franchise business model.
The Colorado Legal Services (2014) states that Chapter 9 of the Labor Law protects individuals from discrimination at workplace and provides guidance to employees on the courses of action they should take if discriminated. Mathew 7:12 states that “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets” (Open Bible, 2014). With reference to the labor law, discrimination is disallowed therefore Shania cannot discriminate the other employees for not being ethnic minorities. This is not a shared qualification that all employees can support. Religiously, the bible reference shows that Shania should take the best course of