I can tell you 100% it is correct.The threatening past behavior...

I can tell you 100% it is correct.
The threatening past behavior of breaching franchisees to resell is exactly what started it all.
a franchisee who has nil left Doesnt care about threats of legal action for the money. They know it's bad press for RFG so they just walk out.
Internally the pressure is on just keep doors open so they can try to sell the "xx stores".
First language is English. You quoted me so not sure which bit is hard to understand.
They had a dozen brands. You looked at a couple of the agreements. I suggest you didnt look at agreements in recent years as the height of arrogance came into play with the belief of how strong the brands are. And especially as they acquired brands with current deals to be honoured.
They have franchisees wanting to give stores away and they get offered to current franchisees who wont touch the stores.

The bigger Franchise question is around landlord greed. Foot traffic of a million a week is worth nothing if the same offering like "coffee" has 50 offerings in a centre. Landlords also lock big chains into expensive store designs etc then allow pop up stores on short leases open nearby.
Example being the "doughnut time" temp outlets popping up within meters of Donut kings, Michels, Gloria Jeans outlets before they fell over.