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.

For more than a year, we have watched, read and experienced the challenges of driving consumers to our brands, finding money to open new concepts and identifying qualified franchisees.  There are signs that point to a consistent recovery incline happening as we speak.  We are certainly seeing it in our Planet Smoothie and Shane's Rib Shack concepts.

 

Sourcing money is a different challenge, but with the stock market's impressive run, investors are returning to the game.  However, they remain few and far between and so we believe dollars exist for those brands with compelling stories, differentiated products and a vision to scale beyond the four walls of their business.  Let's reserve that topic for another blog entry. 

 

That leaves us with finding good franchisees.  By good we mean experienced, reasonably well capitalized and eager to be engaged in the business.  If not the latter, then they better be married to an impressive GM.  Today, I believe to find good franchisees, one must explore multi-concept, multi-unit, retired military, entrepreneur and what we call buddy-share (three or more colleagues investing).  I also believe it takes multiple versions of franchising:  traditional vs operating partner that lends itself to varying degrees of financial commitment and profitability.  Once you have defined your strategy for who, then you must address the question how do you find these candidates.

 

Without handing over the golden goose, I can tell you it's an involved recipe of PR, Social Media, Market Tours and overall brand visibility that enables you to show up on the radar of good franchisees while not burning too much time sorting through the bad and the ugly. 

It seems a mock version of the Flannery O'Conner title is appropriate given the fact that Good Franchisees Are Hard to Find, these days and in general.  As the story begins innocently enough, the family ventures out on vacation, led by a cantakerous grandmother.  They eventually come across the Misfit character, an escaped murderer who seems harmless enough ... maybe even a good man until he ultimately kills the entire family at the close of the story, only to be revealed as the son of the grandmother.  Isn't that what makes the search for a good franchisee so hard.  So many can look good on paper, but once they get in the system, it's difficult to know who is going to be a team player ... who is going to be active in their local store marketing ... who is going to be a role model vs who is going to be absent, litigious, a violator of the brand.  Multi-unit and multi-concept operators do take the guess work out of it because they have a track record of compliance, of engagement of management and ultimately of success.  So that may be the best starting point.  And the fact is, those "men" are easier to find at industry shows, in the press, on LinkedIn, etc.  At the end of the day, I do believe, if you are a good franchisor, "A Good Franchisee Isn't So Hard to Find."  

I'm sure you remember the now famous "Where's the Beef?" ads (the ones with the three old ladies and the fluffy bun). I remember how good those commercials were and that they were spot on in defining the Wendy's brand in a clear and focused way. Those ads were great! But in the years since the death of Mr. Thomas, and with the several failed Marketing campaigns, the brand's image has struggled to find its place.

QSR's associate editor, Sam Oches, snagged an exclusive interview with Odoba's vice president of franchise development, Todd Owen, last week. In the Q&A, Owen points to the brand's large number of multi-concept franchisees as the source of its success.

Owen goes on to explain that there are three reasons the brand is attractive to such high-level partners. According to him, Qdoba is good for franchisees who have already built out their market with their other brands, who are looking to transition from the hard-hit casual-dining segment, and who are interested in an all-around good brand.

But, dare I remind everyone, there's a recession going on. I keep hearing that qualified (read: financed) franchisees are as hard to find as Balloon Boy. Are there even multi-concept franchisees out there that are looking to expand?

In interview after interview, I'm hearing that corporate is ready to pounce on a market but execs can't find any solid franchisees to take the reins. Banks aren't lending, the SBA is struggling, and few existing franchisees are in the market to take on another concept.

Qdoba, of course, isn't the only brand woo-ing these types of franchisees. Most brands would love to have more multi-concept partners on their teams, and some are finding them. But just like a good man, great franchisees aren't just cruising Match.com waiting to be picked up.

Where can brands find these types of people? Is it all about who you know? Or are there even big, stable, experienced franchisees even out there to be had? Tell me what you're seeing.

Is KFC's newest publicity stunt in the best taste? Maybe not. Effective? I think so. Sometimes it seems the most off the wall stunts are the ones that gain the most attention. The image of Colonel Sanders demanding a seat in the UN General Assembly for "Grill Nation", giving free chicken to UN employees, and declaring this coming Monday UNFryday while handing out free grilled chicken at 5000 stores is really pretty clever. I believe this latest stunt will indeed boost sales and create a major buzz. As you said, Blair, we're all already talking about it.

While some consumers think Colonel Sander's wacky plea to the UN is quite funny, others will undoubtedly think the stunt is far from humorous as well as inappropriately timed, considering the global recession, wars in the Middle East, and UN Climate Negotiations in Copenhagen just over a month away.

My thought is that YUM! Brands' screwball marketing campaign, as silly as it is, be met with serious commitment to corporate responsibility on a global level. Perhaps in their plea to the UN, they should have also promised to adhere to the UN Global Compact's Ten Principles for Corporate Sustainability. At least that way we all know that for them, responsibility comes first, even if the approach is tongue-in-cheek.

In today's news, the Fed is slashing Wall Street salaries, Iran is in negotiations that could slow its nuclear program, and KFC is lobbying to get a seat in the United Nations.

OK, which one of these doesn't belong?

If you guessed the KFC publicity stunt, I'd say you're 100 percent correct. KFC has a history of these types of antics. I remember in 2007, the company asked for the pope's blessing of its then-new KFC Fish Snacker. Did KFC ever get a response? Who knows. But the buzz was great. We covered it on our Web site, and I specifically remember telling parishoners about it that Lenten season.

Yesterday's stunt with the U.N. is really no better or worse. What it is, is unoriginal.

The motive behind the U.N. request is the company's "Grilled Nation"--the 60 million people who have tried the chicken brand's newest grilled menu item. On Monday, Oct. 26, the company is celebrating "UNFry Day" by giving away a piece of free grilled chicken to customers across the country.

If the goal is to get as many people through the door to try the product, why involve an international governing body? The pope stunt was unique, but this latest publicity attempt makes the company's marketing efforts seem unoriginal and (dare I say) annoying.

The international community is waging two major wars, battling a global recession, and trying to keep nuclear proliferation to a minimum. Does the U.N. really need KFC knocking on its door asking to sit in on talks? I think not.

It's not that the company is incapable of launching a smart marketing campaign. Just last year, it had a great one. If any of the 2008 presidential candidates mentioned world hunger in a presidential debate, the company offered to donate $20,000 to hunger relief efforts. Now, that's edgy.

All this, of course, is just my opinion. What do you think of KFC's new marketing effort? Is it time the company stops wasting people's time or is it publicity pay dirt? What other brands have you seen use these kind of tactics? Do they really work?

Either way, we're already talking about it. So I guess the joke's on us ...

Now this is what I call eye opening. What I love about this receipt is that it tells me how many calories my order has based on the way I choose to customize it. In addition, it tells me what percentage of my daily caloric intake has been fulfilled, which in turn will definitely make me think twice about what I eat for the rest of the day.

Overall, I think this is a great idea. As you can tell, an 888 calorie lunch is a little over the top, but this restaurant was not afraid to put it out there. Instead of waiting for legislation to make QSRs advertise calories and other not so glamorous nutritional information on their best selling menu items, why not just tell the consumer up front what they're getting. Could this be one proactive solution to this problem of impending doom? I think so. By spelling it out for consumers, QSRs put the ball back in the consumers' court and in the process empower them to make decisions they can live with. I believe consumers will respect this decision and thank them for giving this gift of power.