Franchises were often sold as the “safe option” for entrepreneurs.

Indeed, it might be a matter for debate whether running a franchise is even entrepreneurship. Being self-employed but tied to a single supplier is at best a “half way house” between formal employment and classic free-wheeling.

The aristocrats of franchises, domestic dealerships for the big US automobile manufacturers, used to be cited as examples of businesses that were as “risk free” as it was possible for any business to be.

A dealership in the right location was practically a licence to print money.

There is no greater proof of how the world has changed than the fate of those dealerships in 2009. Thousands are being closed. The survivors are being forced to sign restrictive contracts.

This may be short-sighted – since it is difficult to see how the car-makers hope to sell more cars if they have fewer places selling them – but “independent” dealers, like sub-contract suppliers, are cheaper to cut than manufacturing plants.

The irony is, of course, that these “independent” dealers are wholly dependent on their monopoly suppliers.

Needless to say, these small businesses are not getting any of the government money that is being pumped into the big manufacturers.

On the contrary, the government-sponsored Chapter 11 bankruptcies of Chrysler and GM are making it easier to close dealerships – which might otherwise be costly to do under some state laws – and also allow the giants to default on other business creditors.

The government and the big banks, whose debts are usually secured, get priority of course.

There is a lesson here – apart from the obvious one that, as ever, there is one law for the rich and another law for the relatively poor.

There is no “safe option” in business – and there is no such thing as a “risk free” business, never has been, never will be.

Run a mile from anyone who tries to tell you otherwise.