IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v18y2002i2p511-535.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Royalty Rates and Upfront Fees in Share Contracts: Evidence from Franchising

Author

Listed:
  • James A. Brickley

Abstract

This article provides evidence on the determinants of royalties and upfront fees in share contracts by examining how state franchise termination laws affect franchise contracts. The results are consistent with the joint hypothesis that the two-sided moral hazard model explains the terms in franchise contracts and that termination laws increase the relative importance of franchisor effort (due to the extra effort that is required to control system quality). I find that franchise companies that are headquartered in termination-law states charge significantly higher royalty rates than companies headquartered in other states (around 1% higher). Correspondingly, the initial franchise fees are lower for companies headquartered in termination states. Overall, franchisees appear to pay a higher price for franchises in states with protection laws. Consistent with a basic tenet of law and economics, price adjustments appear to offset at least some of the transfers that would otherwise be implied by the laws. Copyright 2002, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • James A. Brickley, 2002. "Royalty Rates and Upfront Fees in Share Contracts: Evidence from Franchising," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 511-535, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:18:y:2002:i:2:p:511-535
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:18:y:2002:i:2:p:511-535. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.