 Eventually , the dispute between Burger King and its franchises came to center on the 2009 @-@ 2010 promotion for the Buck Double sandwich . The Buck Double was a quarter @-@ pound double cheese burger designed to compete against the McDonald 's McDouble sandwich . The primary issue was financial in nature , the franchises claimed that Burger King forced them to sell the sandwich at a loss of 10 ¢ per sandwich . Franchisees sued the parent company claiming that it did not have the authority to dictate pricing structures for the independently held franchises . The court dismissed the case in a decision that stated the company could legally dictate pricing structures over its franchises objections , but found that there was enough evidence to allow the franchises to move forward with their claims of dealing in bad faith in a separate case . In response to the decision , the franchise group filed a second suit that claimed the deal was not properly structured and was implemented without the franchises ' consent . The NFA suit claimed BK acted in bad faith by implementing the deal after the franchises had twice voted down the deal . 
