First Day Franchising, LLC Franchise Review (2026): Costs, Fees, Revenue Potential

• Category: Health & Wellness
• Initial Investment: $138,780 to $248,080
• Franchise Fee: $70,000 for one territory
• Royalty: Greater of 5% of monthly Gross Revenue or the minimum monthly royalty
• Marketing / Ad Fee: 1% National Brand Development Fund, currently, with the right to increase up to 2%
• Key additional recurring fees: Minimum $1,200 per month local area marketing spend; $300 monthly technology fee; possible national or regional account fee of 1% to 10% of gross revenues for applicable accounts
• Number of locations: 2 total outlets at year-end 2024, consisting of 1 franchised and 1 company-owned outlet
• Best Fit: Manager-led owner with active daily oversight

---

The estimated initial investment ranges from $138,780 to $248,080, which places this in a mid-cost startup range based on the disclosure. The largest identified upfront cost is the $70,000 initial franchise fee for one territory.

The disclosure also shows additional funds of $40,000 to $60,000, which suggests working capital is a meaningful part of the opening budget. Technology and equipment appear relevant to the model, and the business is described as operationally intensive, which can increase setup and early operating demands even if the total investment is not at the highest end of franchising.

There is also a multi-territory pricing structure in the disclosure: 2 territories total $135,000, and 3 territories total $195,000.

---

• Royalty: Greater of 5% of monthly Gross Revenue or the minimum monthly royalty
• Brand fund: Currently 1% of Gross Revenue, with the right to increase up to 2%
• Local marketing: Minimum $1,200 per month
• Technology fee: $300 per month
• National or regional account fee: 1% to 10% of Gross Revenues for applicable accounts
• Encroachment fee: 5% of Gross Revenue earned in another franchisee's territory
• Transfer fee: $10,000
• Annual conference: Up to $1,200 per person
• Non-compliance fees: $150 reporting non-compliance; $450 to $1,000 operations non-compliance; $150 payment non-compliance
• Interest on overdue amounts: 18% per annum, subject to legal limits

Overall, the recurring fee load appears moderate on the core royalty side, but the total burden can rise once the brand fund, local marketing minimum, technology fee, and account-specific charges are included.

---

Yes, the FDD includes Item 19 financial performance data, but it is limited to one affiliate-owned outlet over three fiscal years: FY 2022, FY 2023, and FY 2024. The two franchised outlets in the system were excluded because neither operated for the entirety of a measuring period.

Item 19 disclosed figures

Gross Revenue

• FY 2022: $3,728,515
• FY 2023: $7,054,838
• FY 2024: $8,908,974
• Average: $6,564,109
• Median: $7,054,838
• Range: $3,728,515 to $8,908,974

Adjusted EBITDA (if franchised)

• FY 2022: $300,303
• FY 2023: $1,237,186
• FY 2024: $1,479,881
• Average: $1,005,790
• Median: $1,237,186
• Range: $300,303 to $1,479,881

EBITDA Margin

• FY 2022: 8.05%
• FY 2023: 17.54%
• FY 2024: 16.61%
• Average: 14.07%
• Median: 16.61%
• Range: 8.05% to 17.54%

Expense lines shown in Item 19

• Salaries and Wages: $2,563,452; $4,527,472; $5,883,176
• Rent: $16,970; $34,662; $53,252
• Advertising: $21,224; $61,401; $88,734
• Other Operating Expenses: $598,803; $765,726; $860,732
• Royalty adjustment: $186,426; $352,742; $445,449
• Brand fund adjustment: $37,285; $70,548; $89,090
• Technology fee: $3,600 each year

The main takeaway is that the disclosed revenue and adjusted EBITDA figures increased materially across the three years shown. However, the spread is also wide, and this is not a same-store comparison across multiple franchisees. It is one affiliate-owned outlet over time.

Two important limits matter here. First, revenue is not profit. Even the disclosed adjusted EBITDA is not the same as net income, owner pay, or cash flow to an investor. Second, the affiliate-owned outlet operated in a territory the disclosure says is similar in size to about 4 franchised territories, with an approximate population of 10,700,000 individuals. That makes direct comparison to a single franchised territory difficult.

The disclosure states these figures were obtained from profit and loss reports submitted by the affiliate-owned outlet. The disclosure does not clearly establish that the Item 19 figures are audited.

---

• Model: B2B, according to the disclosure's audience inference
• Revenue pattern: Service-based revenue, likely ongoing rather than one-time, though the disclosure does not clearly break revenue into recurring versus episodic categories
• Operating characteristics: Daily management and supervision are required; a managing owner must be approved by the franchisor; technology appears significant; equipment needs are meaningful; the business is operationally intensive
• Territory: Non-exclusive, with limited ability to operate outside the territory

---

Advantages

• Item 19 includes both revenue and expense lines, not just top-line sales.
• The disclosure provides three years of operating history for the affiliate-owned outlet.
• Core royalty is stated as 5% of gross revenue, with a 90-day delay in collection noted in the disclosure.
• Startup investment is in a mid-range band rather than an extreme capital requirement.

Considerations

• The system was still very small at year-end 2024, with only 1 franchised outlet and 1 company-owned outlet.
• Item 19 is based on one affiliate-owned outlet, not a broad set of franchisee results.
• That affiliate outlet operated in a territory said to be comparable to about 4 franchised territories, which may overstate what one standard territory could produce.
• The business requires daily management and supervision, which reduces passive ownership appeal.
• Recurring obligations extend beyond royalty to include brand fund, local marketing minimums, technology fees, and possible account-specific fees.

---

This franchise may fit an owner who is prepared for active oversight, can manage a service operation with significant staffing expense, and is comfortable evaluating a concept with limited franchised operating history.

It likely does not fit someone seeking a passive investment, a highly established franchise base, or a model where Item 19 reflects many comparable franchised units.

---

• Territory protection is non-exclusive, which can limit the practical value of a territory.
• The disclosure references an encroachment fee structure, indicating territory overlap can occur under some circumstances.
• Salaries and wages are the largest disclosed expense line in Item 19, pointing to labor dependence.
• The franchisor began offering franchises in July 2023, so franchise system history is limited.
• The disclosure notes that in Maryland, initial fees and payments owed by franchisees shall be deferred until the franchisor completes its pre-opening obligations, based on the franchisor's financial condition.

---

First Day Franchising, LLC presents a service franchise with meaningful disclosed revenue history at the affiliate level and a mid-range startup cost. The main tradeoff is that the available performance data is detailed but narrow: it comes from one affiliate-owned operation in a much larger territory, while the franchised system itself remains early and small.

---