Is restaurant franchising capital a substitute for or a complement to debt?

Since Oxenfeldt and Kelly's 1969 study, the resource scarcity hypothesis has been considered a representative theory to explain franchising motivations. Whether franchising capital is a substitute for or a complement to debt has been discussed in the franchise literature but the relationship remains unclear. Using Frank and Goyal's (2003) financial deficit model along with trade-off and pecking order theories, this study shed light on whether franchising capital acts as a substitute for and/or to complement debt in the restaurant industry. This study discovered that the adjustment speed of long-term debt leverage was faster for franchise restaurant firms than non-franchise restaurant firms. Further, the average long-term leverage target was lower for franchise restaurants. Consequently, this study revealed that franchising capital functioned as a substitute for long-term debt. In contrast, the adjustment speed of short-term debt leverage was slower for franchise restaurants and, thus, franchising capital complemented short-term debt.