Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Buying an EF franchise

Get TEFL Certified & Start Your Adventure Today!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Buying an EF franchise
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> China (Job-related Posts Only)

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

englishgibson

Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Posts: 4345

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:39 am Post subject:

clark.w.griswald wrote:

Personally I think that the EF franchise fees are just too high and I think that this, more than any other single reason, is why franchisees jump ship. I don't think that it indicates dissatisfaction with the organization but moreso an opportunity by the franchisees to try and save a few bucks. So EF's biggest mistake here in my mind is believing that their name is worth more here than it probably really is.

If those fees were a bit lower, would you buy one Confused

I mean, you've learnt so much about EF from our forums that you could actually run one yourself Laughing

In my opinion, the biggest mistake here in my mind is believing that your posts and your "thinking" about EF on our forums is worth at all. If there's a chance of buying "Clark's thinking about EF" stocks, would anyone buy it Confused

Quote:

The same situation has happened in Taiwan with the Subway sandwhich chain.

I "think" that EF should start selling those sandwiches in China. Wink

Quote:

From a teachers point of view I am not sure...

I see where you are coming from there Smile

Peace to our experiences on
and
cheers and beers to the buximan's thinking as well as EF ambitions Very Happy

evaforsure

Joined: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 1217

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:27 am Post subject:

The business climate of China is based on war like business practice.
Any franchise business is subject to the same type of treachery.

Subways are the most failed business in the world ( and of dubious quality in China as many have closed due to the franchiser not maintaining quality in the franchise) and often have had complaints as to their operation in territories previously promised to the franchisee..and the reason most franchisees jump ship in China is the home office not maintaining the promises made to the franchise owner. This is the main reason given by previous franchise owners.

Quote:

While the EF brand name may encourage students to sign up in the first place, I don't think that it is the main reason that they sign up.

If this were true, no banding of an educational facility would be worth the money spent. The whole idea of a franchise is to provide a name synonymous with quality. The reason I have heard as to why they are giving up the franchise trademark is that EF didn't deliver what was promised and by allowing the franchises to leave without recourse. They are proving that they have no real control and this will encourage other EFs to follow suit.

Quote:

From a teachers point of view I am not sure that any of this really matters provided that you get paid for the work that you do and that you feel comfortable with the position that you have.

Apparently it does mater to many who post on this subject and it would seem that it was the responsibility of the franchise office to let the job applicant know if they were sending them to a troubled location. Perhaps this is EF's trouble..they have not been straight with all concerned...franchisers cannot be faulted on not staying with a franchise that is not delivering what they promised.

clark.w.griswald

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 2056

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:12 am Post subject:

evaforsure wrote:

The business climate of China is based on war like business practice. Any franchise business is subject to the same type of treachery.

Treachery from the franchisees?! So how is that the franchisors fault?

The gist that I am getting from some in this thread is that the franchisee's decision to jump ship must be based upon failings by EF. That may be true as I am sure that there is some dissatisfaction. But to me it is more likely that EF franchisees jump ship for the same reasons that franchisees of other chains (not just educational ones) jump ship and that is greed. After a few years running as a franchise the owners feel that they can do it just as well themselves without the need to pay franchise fees. Sometimes they can, but generally they let standards slide and they become just another business. Subber is a good example of this on a large scale.

evaforsure wrote:

If this were true, no banding of an educational facility would be worth the money spent. The whole idea of a franchise is to provide a name synonymous with quality.

So are you suggesting that EF is a name in the local market synonymous with quality English language instruction? I don't think that it is.

I think that the reason many students choose to study at EF is the way that they market themselves and not based upon quality of education or lack thereof.

EF choose good locations. EF undertake strategic promotions. They maintain their premises at a professional level. They have lots of foreign staff. To me these are the reasons that students choose EF.

So if franchisees were just paying for the name then I would agree with you that it is not worth the money. But to me the value of the franchise is the support and know how that comes with that, not the name.

evaforsure wrote:

The reason I have heard as to why they are giving up the franchise trademark is that EF didn't deliver what was promised and by allowing the franchises to leave without recourse. They are proving that they have no real control and this will encourage other EFs to follow suit.

This could certainly be true but as I wrote above I think it more likely that the main reason franchisees jump ship is for financial benefit rather than some kind of moral stand.

I agree that EF should do something about schools that jump ship if they don't want the pattern to continue. I like the way that Subway is fighting back by opening new franchise operations next door to the ones who jumped ship.

evaforsure wrote:

I don't really understand the connection you are making here. The people who are being critical of EF franchisees jumping ship are largely the ones who are critical of EF in general.

evaforsure wrote:

Perhaps this is EF's trouble..they have not been straight with all concerned...franchisers cannot be faulted on not staying with a franchise that is not delivering what they promised.

Is that why the franchisees are leaving the chain? I doubt it but I welcome more information about this. I really believe that the franchisees motives are money - they feel that they can make more on their own. Good luck to them as they may just be successful, but I think that it says more about those inidividuals than it does about the organization that they choose to leave.

englishgibson

Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Posts: 4345

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:33 am Post subject:

Quote:

The gist that I am getting from some in this thread is that the franchisee's decision to jump ship must be based upon failings by EF.

The gist that I am getting from you on EF related threads is that you must be planning to buy an EF franchise Confused

Quote:

I am sure that there is some dissatisfaction.

And you are sure 'cause you've been readin' our forums Laughing

Quote:

EF choose good locations. EF undertake strategic promotions. They maintain their premises at a professional level. They have lots of foreign staff. To me these are the reasons that students choose EF.

To you and to your EF knowledge/experience Laughing

Quote:

one wrote:
Apparently it does mater to many who post on this subject and it would seem that it was the responsibility of the franchise office to let the job applicant know if they were sending them to a troubled location
buximan's reply:
I don't really understand the connection you are making here. The people who are being critical of EF franchisees jumping ship are largely the ones who are critical of EF in general.

Yes, you don't understand..and that might be 'cause you've never worked in EF ... you've never worked in esl, have you? Wink

Buximan, buy an EF franchise, will ya? Laughing

Peace to schools in Taiwan as well as schools in China
and
cheers and beers to the ones that'll stay away from EF Very Happy

evaforsure

Joined: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 1217

Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:26 am Post subject:

Quote:

evaforsure wrote:
If this were true, no banding of an educational facility would be worth the money spent. The whole idea of a franchise is to provide a name synonymous with quality.

So are you suggesting that EF is a name in the local market synonymous with quality English language instruction? I don't think that it is.

I would agree with you that EF's name is not synonymous with quality anymore but when the franchises were purchase, they did have a branded name. Part of the problem with the owners is that they feel that EF has not been sensitive to their changing needs and that EF is not delivering on the franchise agreement.

Quote:

So if franchisees were just paying for the name then I would agree with you that it is not worth the money. But to me the value of the franchise is the support and know how that comes with that, not the name.

This is the very reason given by many franchise holders in China as to why they pull out. Remember those EF owners giving up their franchises may not be motivated by greed but instead may be leaving cause of non performance on EF's part.

Quote:

evaforsure wrote:
The reason I have heard as to why they are giving up the franchise trademark is that EF didn't deliver what was promised and by allowing the franchises to leave without recourse. They are proving that they have no real control and this will encourage other EFs to follow suit.

This could certainly be true but as I wrote above I think it more likely that the main reason franchisees jump ship is for financial benefit rather than some kind of moral stand.

Why do you think this and do you read the post before you answer. Where do you get that I am indicating the franshisors are jumping ship for moral reason. EF owners are constantly complaining that EF is not doing their job. And while your fondness for the way that Subway operates is misplaced, I do understand your intention in your support for violating the contract and opening additional centers. Another thing EF is accused of doing to current franchise holders.

Quote:

evaforsure wrote:
Apparently it does mater to many who post on this subject and it would seem that it was the responsibility of the franchise office to let the job applicant know if they were sending them to a troubled location.

I don't really understand the connection you are making here. The people who are being critical of EF franchisees jumping ship are largely the ones who are critical of EF in general.

Those who have been placed in EFs that are not abiding by the corporate rules and operation standards have also voice concerns and complaints and you concentration on this board apparently doesn't allow you to look beyond Dave's border.

Quote:

Clark: I really believe that the franchisees motives are money - they feel that they can make more on their own. Good luck to them as they may just be successful, but I think that it says more about those individuals than it does about the organization that they choose to leave.

Why do you believe this and if partners, who have felt ignored by the corporate office, were making money and felt that they were being treated fair, would'nt they maintain a lucrative relationship with their home office. The bottom line is that many franchise owners in China jump ship to stop losing money.

englishgibson

Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Posts: 4345

Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:06 pm Post subject:

evaforsure, you surely get into those difficult issues of EF franchise with quite a bit of confidence, i must say Wink

would you be kind as well as brave enough to tell us where your confidence comes from Confused

Quote:

...EF's name is not synonymous with quality anymore but when the franchises were purchase, they did have a branded name. Part of the problem with the owners is that they feel that EF has not been sensitive to their changing needs and that EF is not delivering on the franchise agreement.

how would you know the EF owners feelings Confused

what are "their changing needs" Confused

..are those the needs to carry out classes of 50 students in one stinky public school's classroom where a load of parents stares through the windows Confused

or are those the needs to use any academic material that the customer suggests Confused

or are those the needs of traveling to out of the city/EF premises more than half an hour away Confused

or are those the needs that "there's no need for a DoS" Confused

or are those the needs of the owners ambitions to open yet another center for a requested discounted franchise price of 300 000 RMB Confused

or are those the needs for reduced roalty fees Confused

speaking of farce EF franchise agreements that have been twisted just like the lemon in my martini next to my lovely keyboard Smile

yes, i am not drinkin' beer tonight Smile

Quote:

someone wrote:
So if franchisees were just paying for the name then I would agree with you that it is not worth the money. But to me the value of the franchise is the support and know how that comes with that, not the name.
someone assured:
This is the very reason given by many franchise holders in China as to why they pull out. Remember those EF owners giving up their franchises may not be motivated by greed but instead may be leaving cause of non performance on EF's part.

it partially is true that " EF's non performance" is to be blamed for the EF owners dissatisfaction, however EF owners have invested in their franchises knowing they were going into a biz they knew little or nothing about...those same owners are in a need of babysitters, not a franchisor's support Wink

some of those owner came in the biz to wash their dirty money, some came in to look good in front of their neighbors 'cause they have a franchised foreign language center (worth respect in china), some came in hopin' to "expand" their franchised operation within their cities or around, but when they found out that they needed the same money for another center they began CLONING Wink

EF's franchisees and franchisors have come to conflicts for a number of reasons...the franchisors' lack of support surely comes as a good excuse, evaforsure Wink

there've been numerous conflists in between and there've been some conflicts of interests as well...franchisors've looked for their types of franchisees (marketin' strategy)...they've got what they've bargined for, and then the franchisees've got what they've wished for..so, they both deserve each other Laughing

peace to the buximan's new EF center
and
cheers and martinis to our evaforsure's knowledge of EF English First in China Very Happy

_____________________________________________________________
i love emoticons, but there aren't enough to express myself

clark.w.griswald

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 2056

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:11 am Post subject:

evaforsure wrote:

I would agree with you that EF's name is not synonymous with quality anymore but when the franchises were purchase, they did have a branded name.

As I have stated I don't believe that students (and therefore franchise owners) are sold solely on the name, but instead the fact that they are buying into a complete package. Often franchisees don't know anything about setting up and running a school themselves as if they did they would do it themselves. They turn to the franchise option as everything is laid out for them.

evaforsure wrote:

Part of the problem with the owners is that they feel that EF has not been sensitive to their changing needs and that EF is not delivering on the franchise agreement.

I don't doubt this for a moment. Franchisee's are paying a lot of money to the chain so they want to get their monies worth. I am sure that they find plenty of legitimate and perhaps some illegitimate reasons to complain about the value of the franchise especially once the school is up and running and earning money.

Not a challenge but more out of curiosity - could you share with us some of the areas where EF is not delivering?

evaforsure wrote:

Remember those EF owners giving up their franchises may not be motivated by greed but instead may be leaving cause of non performance on EF's part.

Agreed. I believe that the main driving factor for them jumping ship is financial but I do accept that there are other reasons why this may occur. What percentage are we looking at as having jumped? I am guessing less than 10%. So if the chain is not living up to it's contractual obligations to the franchisees then why are the other 90% still plodding along?

evaforsure wrote:

EF owners are constantly complaining that EF is not doing their job.

Just like teachers I am sure that some franchise owners come to dislike EF. In some cases they have good reason to dislike them while in other cases their problems are really personal ones not professional ones. I am sure that there are genuine problems in the franchisee/franchisor relationship but the fact that many schools remain part of the chain for many years suggests to me that the problems are not as widespread as some are suggesting.

evaforsure wrote:

And while your fondness for the way that Subway operates is misplaced, I do understand your intention in your support for violating the contract and opening additional centers. Another thing EF is accused of doing to current franchise holders.

What fondness for the way that Subway operates? Please explain this as I don't understand what you mean?

evaforsure wrote:

I resent this suggestion. I have repeatedly stated that there are some EF schools that should best be avoided so I don't have my head in the sand which is the message that I get from your post above.

I am still not clear how the franchisee/franchisor relationship is one that should concern the teachers. I can understand job security as being a concern but as we have seen the schools that jump tend to want to keep the teachers on, and even if they don't EF generally seem willing to transfer the teachers concerned.

evaforsure wrote:

If you are running a franchise and you have a great relationship with head office but realize (or perhaps think) that you now know how to run a school why would you want to continue paying franchise fees if you didn't have to?

If you had a poor relationship with head office and you realized (or perhaps thought) that you could run your business without the need to pay franchise fees and deal with head office then you would probably also consider leaving.

I agree that disatisfaction with the chain would be reason to leave, but money is also a driving factor in many cases. It is wrong of me to have generalized earlier that money is the main or only reason as there are likely exceptions, but it clear to me that it is certainly a major driving factor.

evaforsure wrote:

The bottom line is that many franchise owners in China jump ship to stop losing money.

Interesting. I don't get the impression that those that I am aware of that jumped ship were doing badly before they jumped and in fact they seem to have been doing pretty well before they jumped. Again I accept that there may be examples of what you suggest however.

evaforsure

Joined: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 1217

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:47 am Post subject:

Quote:

evaforsure wrote:
I would agree with you that EF's name is not synonymous with quality anymore but when the franchises were purchase, they did have a branded name.

As I have stated I don't believe that students (and therefore franchise owners) are sold solely on the name, but instead the fact that they are buying into a complete package.

This is what branding is all about...but the package as started to unravel.

Quote:

What percentage are we looking at as having jumped? I am guessing less than 10%. So if the chain is not living up to it's contractual obligations to the franchisees then why are the other 90% still plodding along?

Where do you get your numbers? Throwing around numbers and words like "most" and indicating a % is highly misleading and doesn't account for those centers that maintain a relationship for contractual reasons. I am not saying that all "owners" would like to pull out, but there must be a problem when this many centers drop a branded name to pursue a solo direction. It is rather disruptive to business to engage in a "name change" and usually business owners will avoid disruptive practices unless they feel it is in an effort to build a healthy financial climate or because they feel that the corporate office has not kept up with it obligations.

Quote:

evaforsure wrote:
EF owners are constantly complaining that EF is not doing their job.

Just like teachers I am sure that some franchise owners come to dislike EF. In some cases they have good reason to dislike them while in other cases their problems are really personal ones not professional ones. I am sure that there are genuine problems in the franchisee/franchiser relationship but the fact that many schools remain part of the chain for many years suggests to me that the problems are not as widespread as some are suggesting.

Franchise owners are the one who count when it comes to complaining and why bring up Foreign Teachers as they do not buy franchises. Clark, you seem to be confusing your threads. I am speaking as to owners and not teachers. And professional problems are personal to an owner who has his well being tied up in a business. One question Clark, what constitutes "widespread". Again another ambiguous term with no real measure to gage this statement. I a company has only a percentage of their franchises jumping ship then they have problems.

Quote:

evaforsure wrote:
And while your fondness for the way that Subway operates is misplaced, I do understand your intention in your support for violating the contract and opening additional centers. Another thing EF is accused of doing to current franchise holders.

What fondness for the way that Subway operates? Please explain this as I don't understand what you mean?

Quote:

Clark you wrote:

I agree that EF should do something about schools that jump ship if they don't want the pattern to continue. I like the way that Subway is fighting back by opening new franchise operations next door to the ones who jumped ship.

Subway, the most fail franchiser in history uses this method of intimidation when it could not deliver promises. You have stated that you support this kind of action. Clark, how soon you forget.

Quote:

evaforsure wrote:
Those who have been placed in EFs that are not abiding by the corporate rules and operation standards have also voice concerns and complaints and you concentration on this board apparently doesn't allow you to look beyond Dave's border.

I resent this suggestion. I have repeatedly stated that there are some EF schools that should best be avoided so I don't have my head in the sand which is the message that I get from your post above.

Again, Clark, you need to stay on the subject of the thread if you want to rebut. We are talking about buying a franchise in this thread and it really has little to do with your advice as to which schools to investigate and it does appear your reading this post with your head buried.

vikdk

Joined: 25 Jun 2003
Posts: 1676

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:47 am Post subject:

What I don't get is this -
If now Clark starts to warn us -

Quote:

So are you suggesting that EF is a name in the local market synonymous with quality English language instruction? I don't think that it is.

Why on earth does he recommend this company as starting point for people wanting to come to work as an FT in China?
Does dissatisfied franchisees, bad franchise management and the exploitation of employees make for a good start in this career Question

clark.w.griswald

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 2056

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:53 am Post subject:

evaforsure wrote:

This is what branding is all about...but the package as started to unravel.

My view on this is that franchisees buy into the package not just the name. If they didn't buy an EF they could just as easily buy into any of the other chains. Why they chose EF is no doubt an individual choice but I really doubt that any of the chains have a name locally that would see potential franchisees seek them out.

evaforsure wrote:

I think that you are reading too much into my post. I did not state categorically that these figures were accurate. I stated clearly that they were a guess. I would be very surprised if the actual figures varied too much from these guesstimates though! Do you have anything to suggest that my guess is way off?

evaforsure wrote:

I am not saying that all "owners" would like to pull out, but there must be a problem when this many centers drop a branded name to pursue a solo direction. It is rather disruptive to business to engage in a "name change" and usually business owners will avoid disruptive practices unless they feel it is in an effort to build a healthy financial climate or because they feel that the corporate office has not kept up with it obligations.

I understand what you are saying and to be honest I don't think that it is far off what I am saying.

We both seem to agree that there are a number of reasons that franchisees could want to leave the chain. I have already accepted that my earlier posts probably concentrated solely upon the financial aspects. You seem to be going the other way by concentrating solely upon a believed disatisfaction with the chain. I can see that franchisees would leave for both of these reasons and a combination of the two.

But to me the suggestion that some franchisees leaving the chain must be indicative of problems within the chain is wrong and this is the main point that I am disagreeing with.

I think that there could be any number of reasons for franchisees to leave a chain and clearly financial reasons would be at the top of many lists. We already know that being a member of an EF is expensive so I can see that this would be a concern for franchisees regardless of whether EF was perfect or not. I am sure that even if EF were perfect that some schools would jump ship.

So how many EF chools are there in China and how many have jumped ship? Surely if there were real problems there then we would see numbers of schools jumping ship - I would think that upwards of 20-25% would be indicative of problems in that regard. Less that that does not mean no problems of course, but perhaps raises the point that there may be other reasons that schools leave other than just disatisfaction.

evaforsure wrote:

Franchise owners are the one who count when it comes to complaining and why bring up Foreign Teachers as they do not buy franchises. Clark, you seem to be confusing your threads.

Actually evaforsure I think that it may be you who is confused. My comment about teachers goes back to an earlier post that you replied to:

evaforsure wrote:

Quote:

From a teachers point of view I am not sure that any of this really matters provided that you get paid for the work that you do and that you feel comfortable with the position that you have.

So what I wrote in that earlier post, and what you wrote in this post seem to be pretty much the same, yet in that earlier post you disagreed with what I wrote about none of this being particularly relevant to teachers.

evaforsure wrote:

One question Clark, what constitutes "widespread". Again another ambiguous term with no real measure to gage this statement.

You need to ask...?

evaforsure wrote:

I a company has only a percentage of their franchises jumping ship then they have problems.

May be problems but not necessarily the fault of the chain. There are individuals who open franchises with one aim - to learn about the business before starting out on their own - so assuming that this is the case for some of the franchise owners who jump ship, how is that automatically indicative of a problem with the franchisor?

evaforsure wrote:

Subway, the most fail franchiser in history uses this method of intimidation when it could not deliver promises. You have stated that you support this kind of action. Clark, how soon you forget.

I don't see my post as being a 'fondness' for that chain, but instead my belief that the practice that they use for dealing with franchisees who jump ship is a good one. Hence the fact that I didn't understand your earlier post.

If there are legitimate problems in the co-operative relationship then they should be dealt with appropriately. Doing a runner with the know-how and then starting out in competition to your franchisor is in my opinion dishonest. Passing off on the franchisors name is even worse.

Franchisees enter into a contract for a period of time. Franchisees get most benefit in the early period, and the return for the franchisor is the length of time that the contract lasts. When franchisees jump ship prematurely they are breaking their contract after they have gained the benefit. I fully support the franchisor offering the area to a new franchisee and allowing them to open up next door to that previous franchisee. The original franchisor has every right to operate in the area that they previously operated in and in choosing to dissolve the franchise arrangement the previous franchisee should understand that the franchisor is no longer responsible for protecting their area of operations. Let the better man win!

evaforsure wrote:

And evaforsure I would say again that you brought this up so it is not me going off topic by replying to it.

I would be interested in hearing more about the dissatisfication that you refer to as being the reason for some EF schools jumping ship. Could you let us in on some of the problems that you are referring to?

Oh and let's keep the discussion civil hey...free from the edge that is creeping into the posts.

cj750

Joined: 27 Apr 2004
Posts: 3081
Location: Beijing

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:57 am Post subject:

Quote:

What I don't get is this -
If now Clark starts to warn us -
Quote:
So are you suggesting that EF is a name in the local market synonymous with quality English language instruction? I don't think that it is.

Why on earth does he recommend this company as starting point for people wanting to come to work as an FT in China?
Does dissatisfied franchisees, bad franchise management and the exploitation of employees make for a good start in this career

have to agree with you ...as it seems that Clark is warning that quality is not worth seeking when looking for that entry level position.

evaforsure

Joined: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 1217

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:49 am Post subject:

Many of the problems with EF center on pre-sale disclosure issues such as failure to provide disclosure documents.

Other post-sale issues such as threats to terminate a franchise
relationship or failure to provide a promised franchise market or represent pre-sale concerns such as fraud or misrepresentation concerning false or unsubstantiated earnings claims.

Quote:

Oh and let's keep the discussion civil hey...free from the edge that is creeping into the posts.

Wow, are you a mod now. What you think of as a edge may just be a mannor of communication. Such judgement.

China has started an investigation into franchises operations in China which will change the way that many companies are doing business.

vikdk

Joined: 25 Jun 2003
Posts: 1676

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:06 am Post subject:

Quote:

China has started an investigation into franchises operations in China which will change the way that many companies are doing business.

and if you were a Canadian, who had been in China for many years, and who, among his various jobs in China, was listed by one of the larger franchise chains (not EF) as their in-China recruiter - I do suppose you would have a personal interest in this news. I do suppose as well that your own professional links to this kind of operation would affect the way you wrote on this subject - as for me - I'm just sorry for all the FT's who get caught up in some of the mess created by those educational franchise dinosaurs who lumber and plunder after the promise of profit.

clark.w.griswald

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 2056

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:55 pm Post subject:

cj750 wrote:

...as it seems that Clark is warning that quality is not worth seeking when looking for that entry level position.

I�m not sure where you get that impression.

My point is pretty simple. To me the name is not as important as what goes on in the school. I don�t believe that the EF name in itself is synonymous with quality from a franchisee or student point of view. This does not mean that there are not good quality schools within the chain. The same goes for teaching experiences. I don�t believe that the name guarantees one either a bad or a good experience. It is what goes on inside the individual school that makes the difference here.

I believe that I have been very consistent on this point over the years.

evaforsure wrote:

I would assume that the above would easily be proved as all would likely be in written form. So why don't the franchisees seek to dissolve the agreement through formal channels rather than jumping ship if that is indeed what they are doing?

evaforsure wrote:

Wow, are you a mod now. What you think of as a edge may just be a mannor of communication. Such judgement.

No not a mod, just a regular user who is sick of seeing threads derailed by personal attacks, insults, one-upmanship, and other venom. I just don't understand why topics can't be discussed without the nastiness! It is okay to disagree you know without being impolite about it.

evaforsure wrote:

China has started an investigation into franchises operations in China which will change the way that many companies are doing business.

Let's hope that they do a thorough job and not just concentrate on the easy targets. Who is it that is conducting this investigation and what is it that they are looking for?

vikdk

Joined: 25 Jun 2003
Posts: 1676

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:12 pm Post subject:

Quote:

I don�t believe that the name guarantees one either a bad or a good experience. It is what goes on inside the individual school that makes the difference here

.
Dearest Clark - so what exactly goes on in these schools that has made you recommend EF as a suitable place to start a China TEFL career - and do you mean the whole chain since you never name any specific schools - and what makes them any different to other schools - for example how does EF differ from that other well know chain Aston. Can you please employ your own insider experience as a good guide for the rest of us.

Display posts from previous:

	Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> China (Job-related Posts Only)	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 2 of 4

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Teaching Jobs in China