论文部分内容阅读
2005年发生的“普马事件”在中国的零售业界掀起了轩然大波,而事件发生后关于供货商的货款追偿问题更是引人关注。从特许经营的外部责任的角度分析,北京普马和美国普马应对供货商的债权分别承担替代责任和替补责任。
The “Pooh Incident” in 2005 set off an uproar in the retail industry in China. After the incident, the issue of payment recovery of suppliers was even more cause for concern. From the perspective of the external responsibility of franchising, Beijing Puma and America Puma should take the responsibility of substitution and replacement respectively for the claims of suppliers.