Unless we are talking about fine dining, most consumers are driven by convenience, influenced today by price, captured by taste and kept loyal by customer experience and to some extent, creative promotions and third party endorsements.

A decade ago, private label brands were considered by the public to be inferior copies of name brand products. Consumers purchased private label food in a pinch, but there was a certain sense of buying second-rate goods attached to those brands. And, often enough, the product did meet a lower standard than the brand name product standing next to it on the shelf.

In recent years, that has changed. Private label goods have been able to shake the mediocre stereotype and take their place on the shelves of the main stream market. In fact, private label goods have become so popular in recent years that they are not only accepted, but fashionable. This change in public perception has prompted grocery store chains to grow their private label product lines.

The private label trend is benefiting both the consumer and the private label retailer. Because private label products do not have advertising expenses, they come with a lower price tag for both the consumer and for the retailer. The consumer feels this immediately because their dollars stretch further. Retailers benefit because they spend less up front for private label products.

However, and not surprisingly, not everyone is happy about the growing popularity of private label brands. Companies who have traditionally manufactured name brand products have been hit hard. The current economic climate is an invitation for consumers to watch each and every penny they spend. If they can save a few cents by buying a can of private label green beans, they will. And when they take that can of green beans home and open it up, they are pleased to discover that the quality of the product rivals the quality of the name brand. Private labels are competing against brand names in both quality and price, and winning time and time again.

This trend toward private label brands is an interesting phenomenon to watch. One thing is certain, the face of the retail market is definitely changing.

Steffen brings up a good point in his latest blog post about vegetarians and vegans. But it's one that leaves me pretty confused.

His argument is that there's an increasing number of vegetarians and vegans consumers out there today, and restaurants that think they can ignore their menu needs are putting themselves at risk. This makes complete sense to me and is an argument I 100 percent agree with (just read the recent article from the Boston Globe on this growing consumer segment).

But there was one line in Steffen's post that I think is worth paying closer attention to:

Vegetarians don't eat meat for a variety of reasons. Many believe eating meat (as we have grown accustomed to in the U.S.) is not necessarily good for their health.

Vegans do not eat meat either. Nor do vegans consume or use any product that is made from animal or with animal bi-products. They believe these products to be morally wrong because an animal has been exploited to make this product for humans to consume.

The point is that vegetarians and vegans alike are growing in numbers. In June of this year Oprah brought this to our attention with her 21-day vegan diet inspired by author Kelly Freston, author of the book Quantum Wellness, in which she addresses the parallel between spiritual evolution and making conscious decisions about what we decide to eat on a daily basis.

Whether you don't eat meat or think that it is ludicrous not to eat meat, it would be a mistake for anyone in the food industry to take this trend lightly. Let's just say this...if Oprah is endorsing it, it's only a matter of time before the masses will follow suit.

Most food service establishments have tried to meet this demand at some point in the past, but have failed because the cost simply outweighed the benefit. Plain and simple, there just wasn't enough of a demand before now. And, there are ways to approach the situation with this lesson in mind. For instance, labeling a menu item as "vegetarian" may not be the best advertisement for the product even if it is vegetarian. At this stage in the game, "vegetarian" among most consumers still means "taste compromised" even for those that want to order it. Why not consider letting the menu items speak for themselves and not label it as anything different than what it is...real good food.

Adding vegetarian (& vegan although it may be much more difficult) menu choices will cater to this growing trend and maybe even attract customers on the fringe that do eat meat, but are just trying to eat more healthily by eating less meat. There is a market share to be had now and in the future.

I'm glad someone finally brought up the Asian segment on this blog. Sarku Japan looks like an interesting concept, and, especially in this economy, it's always impressive to see a brand grow.

But I have to be honest, I'm not surprised to hear that the chain is taking off. While the Asian segment has been "hot" before (I feel like almost every major chain had an Asian Chicken Salad about five years ago), the segment's new popularity is a bit different this time around.

This time chains aren't stopping at won tons atop a bed of iceberg lettuce. The Asian menu inspirations today seem to be much more exotic. There are Thai influences and Vietnamese dishes popping up on menus that normally used a side dish of eggrolls to fill their Asian-menu-items quota.

If I were a betting woman, I'd put money on the trend continuing. No longer will "Asian" be short for Japanese or Chinese. I'm confident the segment will grow increasingly diverse as influences from other Asian regions (like India) begin to enhance the segment.

The evolution only seems natural, really. Today's generation of young diners aren't afraid of sushi; they've grown up with it being a fast food staple all their lives. It seems appropriate that diners would begin to search for the next exotic segment. And with U.K. consumers already having discovered what Indian cuisine has to offer, I wouldn't be surprised if curry started popping up on more menus across the country.

To prove my point, below are a list of key trends in the "Asian/Noodle Cluster" for this year from Technomic. The overarching theme? Diversity.

*Southeast Asian cuisines go mainstream
*Korean catching on
*Asian-style chicken wings
*Edamame
*Expansion of the sushi menu

I do disagree with Blair's suggestion that fine dining is going through a bit of a crisis.  Well, let me rephrase ... going through a crisis only.

 

The entire industry has been in a crisis.  Fine dining like casual dining faces tougher challenges because of their price points.  That's no different then high-end retail or luxury goods.  I have a friend whose retail store in Atlanta, Sid Mashburn, is well, pricey.  However, Sid was rated as one of the 10 best in men's style by GQ.  That's very Mac.  Does Sid face a recession-influenced crisis?  Sure.  Is he losing customers to lesser quality retail.  Probably.  And so all brands, even five-star hotels are having to be creative with their pricing.  And because some consumers are heading down stream right now doesn't mean they won't turn upstream sooner rather than later when the market makes its way back.  Until QSR can elevate their experience to a Mac-like environment -- better service, cleaner stores, innovative products, it will always be PC.  Ironically, we have been spending a fair amount of time in the Apple stores as it relates to our Planet Smoothie brand, but we don't see Planet Smoothie as QSR especially as we move to elevate our brand as an ultra healthy and natural brand.  We are moving upstream and so we have a better shot at being a Mac.  We see our category as remaining stagnant and therefore, PC.  Sorry if that wasn't the PC thing to say.   

 

Sarku Japan is growing despite the down turn in revenue for restaurant concepts across the board. If you're not familiar, the Sarku Japan concept opened its first unit in Boston back in 1987. Today, the chain has over 200 locations in 36 states. The concept is mostly found in shopping mall food courts, but the company is hoping to change that; in 2008, Sarku Japan opened its first store front version of the restaurant along with an aggressive goal to expand the number of locations to nearly 1000 over the next few years.

Consumers are becoming weary of the same old fast-food options for lunch, and are looking for healthier options at the same quick-service price. Priding themselves on their use of the freshest beef, chicken, seafood, and vegetables, and with made to order sushi and sashimi dishes, Sarku Japan has positioned themselves to be a real competitor in the quick-service industry. With healthier fare being all the rage, a quick-service with healthy, delicious, trans free, no MSG, prepared before your eyes, inexpensive food is not one to be overlooked.

Oh, and they're looking for franchise partners too.

I understand Blair's PC reference is around the computer and more specifically the creative campaign by Mac against PC.  However, other than the incredible philanthropic efforts of Bill Gates, QSR will always be the PC (that's MS Windows) of dining until it can tell you where it sources its food products.  It's the fine dining movement that's pioneering the return of the local farmer and CSAs in local neighborhoods.  It's fine dining restaurants like Atlanta's Holeman and Finch and Abattoir that are serving up some of the most inventive dishes in America that are drawing Gen Y, Gen X and Cuspers.  God save us if QSR becomes the innovative benchmark.  That's a little like saying, the best shows on TV have "real and housewives" in them.   Are there isolated examples of Mac-like behavior below the white table cloth line.  Sure. Kudos to Chipotle for being very Mac when it comes to food quality and educating the consumer.  So if Fast Casual can do it, then let's see if QSR can earn some Mac stripes.  But today, I don't anticipate seeing any such references as iQSR.  Not.   

If you don't agree with the headline, I'm going to ask you to stick with me while I make my case.

The restaurant industry is changing. This time I'm not just talking about the quick-service segment. I'm talking about the industry as a whole. Fine dining, casual dining, quick service, heck, cafeteria dining--the economy has changed it all.

Anyone who watches the industry knows that fine dining is going through a bit of a crisis. Value-conscious consumers are looking elsewhere on Saturday nights out on the town and often that means trading down to casual dining or fast casuals. But yesterday at the annual conference of Women Chefs & Restaurateurs, I was presented with another observation.

Full service is too stuffy. Plain and simple.

Young chefs (usually those under 35) are finding themselves bored with the fine-dining scene. Customers want value and chefs don't want to feel like they're working somewhere their parents would hang out.

As a result, they're striking out on their own and opening quick-service brands. Sure, there's no white table clothes, but that's the point. People go out to eat for the experience, the social aspect. Even if they're just standing in line at Flip Burger, a Top Chef concept, they're getting an experience. Consumers are over being seated in decadent restaurants. The recession has turned the dining scene upside down, and quick serves stand a good chance of being the new "it" restaurants.

By offering value, chef-driven menus, and a bustling atmosphere, quick serves have inadvertently stepped into the spotlight.

Move over fine dining; quick-service is coming into its own. 

Starbucks new instant coffee concept Via, released last month nationwide, seems to be creating a lot of buzz, but not necessarily over the product. Rather the criticism is aimed mostly toward the Starbucks brand image and what essentially amounts to critics citing further evidence that Starbucks has sold out to mainstream America. Do you agree with the following complaints?

1. Starbucks has made a name for themselves as being an environmentally sensitive company. The introduction of Via (which comes in single serving plastic packets which are not bio-degradable) seems to reject Starbucks' green reputation.

2. Starbucks has always been about kicking back in a clique coffee shop atmosphere sipping on your favorite cup of java. Endearing fans lament that Starbucks coffee is more than just coffee. It's about taking time out of your day to relax, decompress and enjoy your beverage. Conversely, Via is an instant coffee that can be brewed anywhere people can find a cup of hot water. Huh?

3. A single serving of Starbucks Via costs just under $1. In a time when so many people are cutting back on extras, who is going to pay a buck for a single cup of instant coffee? Does the quality of Starbucks Via product justify the expense without the experience?

I find it somewhat daring for Starbucks to be releasing this product, especially while the upheaval caused by attempting to rebrand their stores to be "local" is still smoldering. Is Starbucks pushing their luck on this? Will Via be the big comeback Starbucks is counting on, or will it flop the same way New Coke did in 1985? It's obviously still early in the game. So far, critics are having a heyday with Via, but as we well know, it's the consumer who has the last word.