3 ms·

It's easy to hate on McDonald's, but this is a company that actually does a fantastic job of responding to their critics. They have changed their packaging, up

by bhousel 11y ago

It's easy to hate on McDonald's, but this is a company that actually does a fantastic job of responding to their critics. They have changed their packaging, updated the design of their restaurants, eliminated trans-fats from the fry oil, changed how they market to kids, added salads to the menu, posted calorie counts and nutrition info, etc. Despite all the hate, they listen and respond. Even though I don't personally like their food, they are not a company that I would bet against in the long run.

logfromblammo 11y ago
Don't forget a unilateral decision to increase the wages of their lowest-paid workers. Their business is much more than just their product line and supply chain. Their mission is not to serve the best meal, or the cheapest meal, or even the best quality per unit price. They aim to provide a uniform, consistent customer experience, at every point of sale, around the entire world. As a result, their first priority is to always protect the brand. As a result, the food itself is almost inconsequential. They could buy their beef from anyone that can raise enough cattle to make it worth the corporate buyer's salary. But on the other side, they are the only company that can sell the "McDonald's Experience". That's why you don't bet against McDonald's. They have removed the element of uncertainty from eating at a new (to you) restaurant. If you go to any city in the world that has a McDonald's, you can eat there with the psychological assurance that the food there will be no worse than the McDonald's in your very own home town. But it will also be no better. That's the tradeoff. As a result, every other restaurant has to exceed McDonald's in some specific niche of the market if they want customers. If McDonald's is starting to focus on quality, every place that competes with them by having slightly better ingredients had better take notice and respond.
- joezydeco 11y ago
  Don't forget a unilateral decision to increase the wages of their lowest-paid workers. Ah, but that was just for the corporate owned stores. Franchisees, which are 4/5 of the operations, make their own salary decisions.

by bhousel 11y ago

logfromblammo 11y ago

Don't forget a unilateral decision to increase the wages of their lowest-paid workers. Their business is much more than just their product line and supply chain. Their mission is not to serve the best meal, or the cheapest meal, or even the best quality per unit price. They aim to provide a uniform, consistent customer experience, at every point of sale, around the entire world. As a result, their first priority is to always protect the brand. As a result, the food itself is almost inconsequential. They could buy their beef from anyone that can raise enough cattle to make it worth the corporate buyer's salary. But on the other side, they are the only company that can sell the "McDonald's Experience". That's why you don't bet against McDonald's. They have removed the element of uncertainty from eating at a new (to you) restaurant. If you go to any city in the world that has a McDonald's, you can eat there with the psychological assurance that the food there will be no worse than the McDonald's in your very own home town. But it will also be no better. That's the tradeoff. As a result, every other restaurant has to exceed McDonald's in some specific niche of the market if they want customers. If McDonald's is starting to focus on quality, every place that competes with them by having slightly better ingredients had better take notice and respond.

joezydeco 11y ago
Don't forget a unilateral decision to increase the wages of their lowest-paid workers. Ah, but that was just for the corporate owned stores. Franchisees, which are 4/5 of the operations, make their own salary decisions.