How FRANticc verifies franchise data

Every number on this site is tagged with where it came from and how it was checked. This page explains the S1–S7 source system, how a brand's data actually gets researched and reviewed before it publishes, what we deliberately refuse to publish, and how to report an error.

What you're reading

Each brand profile on FRANticc is an editorial summary of a franchise opportunity. The numbers — capex, royalty, store count, format, margins — are researched from public sources, tagged with where they came from, and cross-checked before publication. The narrative — operating model, what makes the brand distinctive, what kind of operator tends to succeed — is editorially written. None of it is paid for or approved by the brands themselves. Full independence statement: Editorial Independence.

The source-tier system (S1–S7)

Every data point in our database — every capex figure, royalty percentage, margin range, store count — carries a source tier. This is the same S1–S7 scale used internally across the platform (visible, for example, as the confidence dots on the Network Pulse growth chart on a brand's page). Tiers run from most to least authoritative:

This tier lives in our database as data_sources.source_tier, alongside source_url and source_description for every field — the rule is that a data point without a traceable source gets marked S7, never silently upgraded. Where a specific number on a brand page has a public source, the page's Sources line names where it came from.

How a brand's data actually gets built

We're candid that a first pass of research on any brand is automated: an LLM-assisted pipeline reads the brand's own franchise page (S1), regulatory filings and industry research (S2–S4), and cross-checks aggregator listings (S6), tagging every extracted field with the tier of the source it came from. That is a starting point, not a finished public record — three things stand between an automated first pass and a live page:

1. A hard data gate. A brand cannot publish without a real capex figure — the single most important number for an investor's decision. No capex, no page.
2. A coverage threshold. We score how much of a brand's profile (legal identity, financials, format, margins, growth history) is actually filled in with real data before the brand is allowed to go live. Thin profiles stay unpublished until there's enough real material to be useful.
3. Human review before write-back. Extracted values that disagree across sources, or fail an internal sanity check (e.g. a capex figure wildly out of line with the brand's own category), are queued in an internal verification tool and reviewed by a person before they're written to a live brand page. Machine extraction proposes; a human disposes.

Separately from data quality, every brand carries a franchise_verified flag — a simple yes/no on whether we've actually confirmed the brand offers an individual franchise, dealership, or investor opportunity at all. Some well-known names on this site (see below) are confirmed as not franchisable and are labeled accordingly rather than silently omitted. Where we display a brand's own franchise-enquiry link, that URL is run through a look-alike-domain safety check before publishing it — so we don't route an investor's enquiry to a scam site impersonating a brand's franchise page.

What "Verified" and "Reported" mean

Source tier (above) says where a number came from. Verified/Reported says whether we could corroborate it. The rule: at least two independent sources must agree before a number is labeled "Verified."

Where multiple sources disagree, we use the median value, surface the range in the page body, and flag the wider spread in the section sources line — we don't average to hide disagreement. We don't carry labels beyond these two: if we don't have enough to call a number Verified or Reported, the field is left blank rather than filled with a confident-looking guess.

What we deliberately don't publish

Corrections

If you represent a brand we cover, are a regulator, an investor, or a journalist who's spotted an error, write to [email protected]. The mailbox is monitored and you'll get a substantive human reply, typically within 24 hours.

Brands we cover can also display the “Verified on FRANticc” badge — a free embed linking to the brand’s independent data profile. It is not an endorsement, and displaying it never affects how a brand’s data is graded.

What happens next

• We locate the specific claim you're disputing and check it against our sources.
• If we're wrong, we fix it quickly — usually within 24 hours of confirming the correction — and tell you exactly what changed.
• If we believe we're right, we'll explain the sourcing behind the number rather than remove it on request.

What we won't do

• Remove an editorial profile because a brand would rather not be covered.
• Publish a number we can't independently corroborate, even if a brand insists it's true.
• Reframe verified data to favor a brand's marketing position.

We log every correction request and its outcome. If you believe a correction was mishandled, escalate to [email protected].

Editorial independence

FRANticc's revenue comes from the franchise investor — a Pro subscription paid by the person evaluating an opportunity. We have never taken brand money, and we're not a franchisor, broker, or seller. The full statement — trademark use, what "not an offer" means, and what independence commits us to — is at Editorial Independence.

Why this page exists

Most franchise-listing sites in India don't disclose where their numbers come from, who reviews them, or what their relationship is with the brands they cover. The result is a category-wide trust deficit — and a very expensive set of decisions made by investors who couldn't tell which numbers were credible. FRANticc's editorial bet is that disclosing the standard is itself the differentiator. This page is part of the standard, and it's updated whenever the underlying process changes — not on a fixed schedule.