Jersey Mike's Subs vs Jimmy John's

Jersey Mike's Subs is the stronger target. It wins on every dimension we scored: TAM (3,227 units vs. 2,777, and 3,201 franchised vs. 2,737), timing (8.3% YoY growth vs. 3.4% — roughly 2.4x the expansion rate, meaning more new-store openings where software gets specified fresh), and budget (AUV of $1.37M vs. $1.01M, a 36% revenue-per-store premium that makes a per-unit software line item far easier to absorb). Higher AUV also means a bigger, more sophisticated operator base — franchisees at that revenue level buy scheduling and back-office tooling rather than tolerate spreadsheets.

The terrain is the decisive edge. Jersey Mike's runs an `approved_supplier` procurement model, so we can sell store-by-store or to multi-unit franchisees without clearing a franchisor gatekeeper. Jimmy John's is `franchisor_controlled` — every deal routes through corporate, which lengthens cycles, concentrates veto power, and lets a single incumbent relationship block us across 2,737 units. That control also shows up in the ad fund (4.5% vs. 1.0%), signaling a more centralized, top-down system where vendor choice is a corporate decision, not an operator one.

The meaningful tradeoff: Jimmy John's higher initial franchise fee ($35K vs. $20K) and controlled procurement suggest a more standardized, better-capitalized franchisee who may adopt faster once corporate approves — and a corporate win there is a 2,700-unit land grab. But we can't bank on that approval, and the slower growth (3.4%) means fewer greenfield openings to seed. Jersey Mike's gives us open terrain, faster store creation, and richer per-store budgets today. Note we're not modeling royalty drag here — the FDD royalty terms aren't in the supported set, so treat total cost of ownership as unquantified and lead with ROI against AUV, not fee comparisons.

Verdict: Target Jersey Mike's now — open procurement, 2.4x growth, and 36% higher AUV beat Jimmy John's centralized gatekeeping despite its larger per-deal upside.