| ||||
Updated RecentlyThe Screenmobile vs Ace DuraFlo Systems Franchise Comparison
Below is an in-depth analysis and side-by-side comparison of The Screenmobile vs Ace DuraFlo Systems including start-up costs and fees, business experience requirements, training & support and financing options.
Start-Up Costs and Fees |
||
| Investment | $83,794 - $164,240 | $46,200 - $410,100 |
| Franchise Fee | $39,500 | $21,900 |
| Royalty Fee | 7% | 6-8% |
| Advertising Fee | $75/mo. | - |
| Year Founded | 1982 | 1997 |
| Year Franchised | 1984 | 2001 |
| Term Of Agreement | 10 years | 10 years |
| Term Of Agreement | 10 years | 10 years |
| Renewal Fee | - | $1K |
Business Experience Requirements |
||
| Experience | - | |
Financing Options |
||
| In-House/3rd Party | In-House/3rd Party | |
| Franchise Fees | Yes/No | No/No |
| Start-up Costs | No/Yes | No/Yes |
| Equipment | No/Yes | No/Yes |
| Inventory | No/Yes | No/Yes |
| Receivables | No/No | No/No |
| Payroll | No/No | No/No |
Training & Support |
||
| Training | - | - |
| Support | Newsletter, Meetings, Internet, Security/safety procedures, Field operations/evaluations | Newsletter, Meetings, Toll-free phone line, Internet, Security/safety procedures, Field operations/evaluations |
| Marketing | Ad slicks | Co-op advertising, Ad slicks, National media, Regional advertising |
| Operations |
Franchise can be run from home. 30% of all franchisees own more than one unit Number of employees needed to run franchised unit: 1 Absentee ownership of franchise is allowed. (100% of current franchisees are owner/operators) |
25% of all franchisees own more than one unit Number of employees needed to run franchised unit: 5 Absentee ownership of franchise is allowed. (50% of current franchisees are owner/operators) |
Expansion Plans |
||
| US Expansion | Yes | - |
| Canada Expansion | No | No |
| International Expansion | No | Yes |
Company Overviews
About The Screenmobile
Veteran Incentives $2,500 off franchise fee
About Ace DuraFlo Systems
Since 1999, ACE DuraFlo has been successfully using its proven system that has saved building owners and homeowners thousands of dollars, while saving occupants the messy, noisy and destructive experience of a repipe. Until now the only effective long-term remedy for encrusted galvanized steel or rust-corroded copper small diameter piping was the expensive and inefficient method of repiping the whole piping system. This meant the nuisance of dirt, noise, and several weeks of being without water. Building owners, homeowners, property managers and tenants are eagerly seeking an alternative to this old fashioned, expensive and frustrating system.