And it’s not like people are tired of burgers. Smashburger, In-N-Out Burger, BurgerFi, and Five Guys Burgers & Fries are all expanding. So is Shake Shack...
McDonalds problem is the same problem they've always had. The food just isn't very good. It never was. No amount of spiffing up the storefront or juggling menu items can help them when competition the likes of the above moves in. All they're doing is driving their prices higher which helps the competition even more.
You're being charitable. It's downright bad, even compared with various other franchises on an item by item basis. The last time I ate in one back in 2008 because nothing else was open that early, I had a breakfast that consisted of scrambled eggs, hash browns, pancakes, and sausage. Everything tasted almost identical - an oily salty mound - with only different chew textures. (Okay, maybe the sausage had a little extra zing from the spice mix, but that was definitely the only tip off). But McDs always was dirt cheap, and their calorie to dollar ratio for (reasonably freshly) prepared food has been tough to beat. If they can't hold the line on prices, I don't see what's left to keep them from losing market share. And I wouldn't miss it one bit.
I think the Big mac and McNugget have a very unique taste and cant say I've heard of or tasted any competitors versions of these that actually tasted similar. Im surprised to see a few people agree with the bland opinion.
Happy meals are a big thing. Huge. Also the new menu helps with the guac/dijon additions. Egg McMuffin has always been huge and the new coffee is way better than before.
But they could make a better burger. I heard the McAngus was great. They should bring that back.
I actually like the food. But I never go to McDonalds, because I can eat a full day's worth of calories in one meal and still be hungry. I don't know how they do it.
I worked in a franchisee-owned McDonalds circa 2011 and I agree with the sentiment of this article. At the time they were trying to be all things to all people. Instead of focusing on their core strength: burgers and fries, they expanded an already crowded menu by introducing items like the McWrap and Fish McBites that nobody really wanted. Since then I think they've been trying to turn things around by trimming the fat from the menu ("getting back to basics") and actually responding to what customers want by doing things like introducing all-day breakfast.
Also, I got the sense that they don't have a great relationship with their franchisees. For example, there's a special salt shaker called AccuSalt[0] that the McDonald's Corporation requires franchisees to own which costs hundreds of dollars if I remember correctly. It's a total ripoff because the thing is a cheap plastic POS that breaks whenever it's dropped and franchisees aren't allowed to buy a generic one. As a result of this and probably 100 other little things, I once heard that the franchisee I worked for got the McDonald's Corporation to fly out an HVAC tech across the country to fix a thermostat out of spite.
Behind the Arches is a great book on the topic of McDonalds. The author argues all their biggest successes came from new product ideas that were forced onto corporate by franchisees who insisted they knew what customers wanted. Meanwhile every product invented by HQ flopped (Kroc was notorious for this).
I'd love to know where the new products in this article come from.
From what I understand, when McDonalds was cratering around when this article was written, they came up with all day breakfast. I've read several writings from franchisees complaining about the complexities of that and how it would cost them in kitchen renovations. Apparently the all day breakfast revitalized sales and McDonalds is on track for a rebound.
From the number of times in my life I've pulled up to a McDonalds drive through looking for breakfast only to find I misjudged the time slightly (and left, because I'm not in the mood for a burger at 10 AM), or the times I looked and found I couldn't because it was already a bit too late, I can totally believe this. Jack in the Box became a go-to for me in college for exactly this reason. Morning classes let out, it's 9:45 or 10, not enough time to get McDonalds breakfast, but I can always get breakfast at Jack in the Box, even if I prefer McMuffins.
Largely a moot point now, since I try to eat fast food sparingly, but boy do I wish they had all day breakfast when I was in my early 20's.
A rebound? I remember reading somewhere(probably HN) that McDonald's makes most of its money from franchise locations rent, so I assumed as long as franchisees are keeping up with their payments their product line is not gonna affect the bottom line that much, I am not an expert on the subject though.
They'd been serving breakfast items all day in other countries for decades. Hong Kong springs to mind as a place you could definitely buy an Egg Mc Muffin anytime of day.
I'm a huge fan of McDonald's, just not a big fan of their food.
> McDonald's exemplifies the role of small businesses in Americans' upward mobility. The company is largely a confederation of small businesses: 85 percent of its U.S. restaurants -- average annual sales, $2.2 million -- are owned by franchisees. McDonald's has made more millionaires, and especially black and Hispanic millionaires, than any other economic entity ever, anywhere.
The all-day breakfast brought them more of my business. I really like the Egg McMuffin. But, the burgers are nothing to write home about - they're thin and not that juicy, and seem to be mostly bun.
Their competition (Wendy's, Burger King) aren't really making good burgers either. I'm lucky that Austin has a wide choice in burgers from various independent restaurateurs.
My kids love McDs, but I would almost never go there for them until all day breakfast started. In my case, the presence of all day breakfast doesn't just increase my breakfast buying from then, it also increases the amount of burgers, fries, and McNuggets that I buy. If my local franchise gets rid of all day breakfast, they will lose virtually all of my business.
Hardee's/Carl's Junior has ridiculously good burgers for a fast food joint. I gotta say though, since we got a Five Guys I don't even bother with them anymore if I want a quick burger.
he says one recent morning as he sits in the Hastings McDonald’s, sipping a skinny vanilla McCafé Latte. Such “foo-foo coffee,” as he calls espresso and its variants, is partly why he bailed: He loves the taste, but the complexities of making it came to epitomize his disillusionment with McD’s. “The service times went up
If McDonalds didn't sell this hard to prepare "foo-foo coffee" then potential patrons will just go across the street to Starbucks... and pick up a sandwich there for lunch too.
I can see why a complex menu creates financial and operational demands on restaurants, but driving customers to other restaurants does too.
Mcdonalds could really benefit from having robot delivery drivers.
If I could order a burger combo and have it dropped off at work or home, and be cheaper than an entire pizza plus tip, i'd order from it way more often than I should.
They recently announced a partnership with Uber for delivery.[0]. Granted, I don't use Uber for various reasons that the HN community is well aware of, but delivered McD's is coming.
interest rates didn't come down immediately after reagan's election. interest rates for mortgages, for example, were still in the mid-teens in the early 80s.
If you look, rates were typically in the 8s up through midway through Carter's term, then spiked in to 9, 10, 11, then 12-16 in 1980, and it took most of Reagan's 2 terms to come back down to the 9 range.
Someone in 1981 would still be thinking of Carter's effects on interest rates, and the rates were "Jimmy Carter-era". They were also "Reagan-era", but not many people point the finger at him for rates going to 16, since he wasn't even elected when that happened.
[+] [-] noonespecial|8 years ago|reply
McDonalds problem is the same problem they've always had. The food just isn't very good. It never was. No amount of spiffing up the storefront or juggling menu items can help them when competition the likes of the above moves in. All they're doing is driving their prices higher which helps the competition even more.
[+] [-] lr4444lr|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] milkthefat|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sjg007|8 years ago|reply
But they could make a better burger. I heard the McAngus was great. They should bring that back.
[+] [-] gozur88|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tylercubell|8 years ago|reply
Also, I got the sense that they don't have a great relationship with their franchisees. For example, there's a special salt shaker called AccuSalt[0] that the McDonald's Corporation requires franchisees to own which costs hundreds of dollars if I remember correctly. It's a total ripoff because the thing is a cheap plastic POS that breaks whenever it's dropped and franchisees aren't allowed to buy a generic one. As a result of this and probably 100 other little things, I once heard that the franchisee I worked for got the McDonald's Corporation to fly out an HVAC tech across the country to fix a thermostat out of spite.
[0]: https://www.sonoco.com/productsandservices/plastics/accusalt...
[+] [-] pgrote|8 years ago|reply
The idea behind tools like this is uniform product preparation. Fries in one McDonalds are almost identical to fries in another.
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ghiculescu|8 years ago|reply
I'd love to know where the new products in this article come from.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/341643.McDonald_s
[+] [-] Clubber|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kbenson|8 years ago|reply
Largely a moot point now, since I try to eat fast food sparingly, but boy do I wish they had all day breakfast when I was in my early 20's.
[+] [-] mrisoli|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] johansch|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dageshi|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jaclaz|8 years ago|reply
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJs9p-VNORw
[+] [-] sqldba|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grecy|8 years ago|reply
He says it's literally a license to print money, and he is now obscenely rich.
[+] [-] seibelj|8 years ago|reply
> McDonald's exemplifies the role of small businesses in Americans' upward mobility. The company is largely a confederation of small businesses: 85 percent of its U.S. restaurants -- average annual sales, $2.2 million -- are owned by franchisees. McDonald's has made more millionaires, and especially black and Hispanic millionaires, than any other economic entity ever, anywhere.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12...
[+] [-] chiph|8 years ago|reply
Their competition (Wendy's, Burger King) aren't really making good burgers either. I'm lucky that Austin has a wide choice in burgers from various independent restaurateurs.
[+] [-] elandybarr|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jdboyd|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wmeredith|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Spooky23|8 years ago|reply
If they wanted to think, they should have kicked a different business.
[+] [-] Johnny555|8 years ago|reply
If McDonalds didn't sell this hard to prepare "foo-foo coffee" then potential patrons will just go across the street to Starbucks... and pick up a sandwich there for lunch too.
I can see why a complex menu creates financial and operational demands on restaurants, but driving customers to other restaurants does too.
[+] [-] jumpkickhit|8 years ago|reply
If I could order a burger combo and have it dropped off at work or home, and be cheaper than an entire pizza plus tip, i'd order from it way more often than I should.
[+] [-] ams6110|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] btgeekboy|8 years ago|reply
[0] https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/mcdelivery.html
[+] [-] dghughes|8 years ago|reply
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/newfound...
[+] [-] microtherion|8 years ago|reply
Oh yeah, I remember that era. 1981, just after Carter's re-election.
[+] [-] mgkimsal|8 years ago|reply
http://www.freddiemac.com/pmms/pmms30.html
If you look, rates were typically in the 8s up through midway through Carter's term, then spiked in to 9, 10, 11, then 12-16 in 1980, and it took most of Reagan's 2 terms to come back down to the 9 range.
Someone in 1981 would still be thinking of Carter's effects on interest rates, and the rates were "Jimmy Carter-era". They were also "Reagan-era", but not many people point the finger at him for rates going to 16, since he wasn't even elected when that happened.
[+] [-] gm-conspiracy|8 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac#History
[+] [-] hueving|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ngold|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] robotjosh|8 years ago|reply