ConDecor Superstore vs Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership

Two franchise systems, side by side. For a software vendor, they are not the same opportunity.

More open target
Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership
wins 3 of 12 vendor rows

Aaron’s hands us a massive, ready-made TAM with 1,162 total units and 224 franchised doors. That franchise count is the real terrain win for a vendor: multi-unit operators with standardized tech stacks and a decision-maker who can deploy across locations. The 2026 FDD and current filing signal an active, compliant franchisor—meaning new franchisees are still entering the system, each a greenfield software installation. The investment range topping out near $838k implies complex, inventory-heavy operations that need POS, scheduling, and back-office muscle. The flat unit growth is the honest tradeoff: we’re not riding an expansion wave, just harvesting a large installed base where churn and replacement cycles generate pipeline. That’s still far more bankable than the alternative.

ConDecor Superstore flashes an intriguing per-unit revenue signal at $1.89M AUV, but that number is built on just two company-owned locations with zero franchisees and an overdue FDD. No franchisee base means no aggregated buying power, no rapid multi-unit deals, and no proof the concept can scale through independent operators. The lower investment floor may attract more candidates someday, but right now the overdue filing kills timing—franchise sales aren’t flowing, and a stale FDD makes lender financing harder, stalling unit growth before it starts. Even with a slightly more efficient 2% ad fund leaving more local budget for tech, there’s simply no volume to sell into. You’d be chasing a handful of corporate-led deals and praying the model takes off.

Budget and terrain tilt further toward Aaron’s because the broader investment band attracts franchisees who can absorb a mandatory tech stack without choking on upfront cost. The approved-supplier procurement on both sides is a neutral factor, but Aaron’s sheer unit mass means even modest attach rates deliver a material book of business. ConDecor’s promise of high AUV can’t offset the existential risk of trying to build a software pipeline around two stores and a non-compliant FDD.

Verdict: Aaron’s is the only viable opportunity here—prioritize its franchisee base over ConDecor’s speculative two-unit revenue.

retail_non_food
ConDecor Superstore
retail_non_food
Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership
Total units
2
1,162
Franchised units
0
224
Unit growth YoY
0%
Average unit revenue (AUV)
$1.89M
Royalty
6%
6%
Ad fund
2%
5%
Initial franchise fee
$60K
$35K
Investment range (low)
$269K
$307K
Investment range (high)
$384K
$838K
Procurement model
Approved supplier
Approved supplier
FDD fiscal year
2024
2026
Filing freshness
OVERDUE
CURRENT

Go deeper

Common questions

ConDecor Superstore vs Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership, answered

ConDecor Superstore has 2 total units and Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership has 1,162, so Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership is the larger system.
Both charge a 6% royalty.
ConDecor Superstore's initial franchise fee is $60K and Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership's is $35K, so Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership has the lower fee.
ConDecor Superstore's initial investment runs $269K–$384K and Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership's runs $307K–$838K, so Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership requires the larger investment.

See this comparison scored to your product.

The vendor edge changes depending on what you sell. Run your site and we’ll re-weight it.