The comment was about stores not being empowered to cancel orders to the detriment of the customers, not about the reasons why that order was cancelled. The point stands if, say, the store was suddenly closed due to a burst pipe. Corporate is counting on there being enough friction in calling them on the phone to prevent people from doing it altogether.

Dunkin's are a franchise, but they're using Dunkin's hardware, software, etc. It's absolutely within their ability to track (and force franchisees to track) inventory. It's also within Dunkin Corp's ability to give stores the capability to provide refunds from the retail locations.

> It's absolutely within their ability to track (and force franchisees to track) inventory

Depends on whether or not the franchisee has implemented inventory tracking correctly.

> It's also within Dunkin Corp's ability to give stores the capability to provide refunds from the retail locations

That's the franchisee's decision at that point. Dunkin's corporate was out of the loop in that transaction and as such is reticent.

Dunkin's tends to hold its franchisees to a lower quality bar imo.

Screw franchises and franchising. That's the kind of business model we need to get rid of, because it's basically a "subsidiary" model that shields the parent company from liability.

At the very least it complicates the dynamic. "Am I really hurting Dunkins or am I just ruining a small business owner that pays a crap ton of money to the franchise owner and mortgaged his house to open this little franchise of Dunkins".