Wendy's Wants to Start Uber-Like Surge Pricing in 2025
gizmodo.com
gizmodo.com
it doesn’t matter if you can afford a baconator right now. it matters if you can afford it in line, and you may not know until you get there.
as if that’s not enough manipulation, maybe you can get a deal if you change your schedule for the local franchise.
in fact, you better plug in for those ticker updates on side prices.
this is where the owl bites the tootsie roll pop. there are so many more layers, but time is up.
The fast food conglomerates really, really, REALLY want to shut down dine-in service for good and transition drive thru to an app-only business model. It’s their #1 strategic imperative.
I would go so far as to say they don’t care about profit here and in fact they’re happy to lose quite a few customers, as long as the “percentage of orders made in app” KPI keeps going up.
i'd imagine that 1) cost difference may be but a few cents / half a dollar, something on that level. extra $0.27 across the country at lunch translates to millions later, but may not be especially noticeable to the average consumer. even a dollar or two might still fly.
and 2) going by what I'm seeing each time I'm in a Wendy's or similar, there are a non-trivial number of Skip / Uber Eats / Dash orders moving out the door. Presumably this is to tap into that credit card paying demo, esp. since in most cases they're not going to argue about 27 cents and don't have to worry about being literally short-changed at checkout.
I highly recommend "Eat, Drink, and Be Healthy" from W. Willett of Harvard Medical. Mediterranean diets high in fish and vegetables are almost unquestionably healthier, and probably the healthiest diet around.
Their McChicken patties and nuggets are definitely some kind of slurry though.
Marketing anything ever as a price hike is usually a sign that marketing wasn’t properly involved in the process.
Or "early bird specials" at a diner, for a nearby segment of the same industry.
So it's one of the things I think could go either way (do people do more of the thing when it becomes cheaper? or less because of appetite suppression), and it's looking more like people are about to have a whole let less junk food as price of GLP1 RAs goes down and availability goes up.
Fast food and other unhealthy food producers may about to be entering a somewhat hard time.
See also this article which is kind of an ad for Sweetgreen by Bloomberg (just tin foil hat talking there), but points a bit in the direction I mean:
The difference is that they have large printed signs advertising the discounted prices and the times they apply (2p-5p). The posted prices are dependable as long as one checks a clock.
fast food is, well, fast, and deisgned to really hit that fat/salt/sugar creaving, but if I can't predict what it will cost me I'll head to places that will give me that promise. it's a big market and none of it is exclusive.
The fact that the realpage domain name even resolves right now suggests to me that collusion won.
Sure, but thats how all markets work. When I want a Spicy Chicken Sandwich™, I want a Spicy Chicken Sandwich™. And there are no substitutes. The whole point of this would be that Wendy's dynamically accounts for this to an acceptable degree I don't cancel altogether. People who want a cheaper meal can go elsewhere, and I can get my Spicy Chicken in a reasonable amount of time. I can honestly see this catching on as crews are blown out to the max with mobile orders these days.
Why would the way the order is made make any difference?
It's the volume. Fast food work used to come in rushes, with a volume limited by the physical location. Now for many locations it's a nonstop queue of online orders from half a dozen systems from the first minute you open to the last minute you close. Great for business terrible for humans.
Mobile options almost completely eliminated that, so you have way more orders at a time than you otherwise would (or the restaurant needs a digital queue of some sort)
Maybe Spicy Chicken Sandwich is not the best analogy because Popeyes and KFC would like a word
with a focus on the most willing consumers, you can probably even make more with fewer employees. keep crews blown out by making them smaller. maybe even add a token performance bonus with confusing math, to motivate those that remain. not that they need it, they should be grateful for not having been let go for non-performance efficiency reasons.
It's almost like Supply & Demand is the Law.
I do, however, like the idea of surge pricing for sit-down restaurants. If restaurant prices raised to guarantee available seats (like hotel rooms), there are plenty of instances where I would pay a premium to eat near an event I'm attending.
Given that labor is viewed as fungible by most employers, why not enable more promiscuity by employees to help with wages and/or security? Things like background checks seem fairly transitive. Maybe do some sort of skill set certifications like food handling, warehousing, basic labor, etc.?
From the employee side, they would get paid more, could pick up shifts at varying businesses based on their schedules. Then maybe at scale, such a platform would be incredibly useful for organizing labor. This obviously would terrify employers.
I'm not really debating, more of just sharing random ideas and complaining online, because this is basic game theory as to why employers wouldn't want such a tool (potentially higher labor costs short/long term, increased labor mobility, unionization risk, other issues like training/liability/insurance/taxes/etc.), but employees/labor could be greatly served by such a platform.
And workers that are too transient will fuck up your pipeline. So they need to be from your pool.
For food deserts, sometimes lacking grocery stores, fast food is sometimes the only practical option. Convenience stores, bodegas, dollar stores, and fast food chains charge high unit prices and the majority of residents have little choice except to commute long distances to big box stores if they had the time, money, and transportation to do so which they probably don't. In these cases, demand for fast food becomes more inelastic where there are fewer or no other options.
This is in contrast to areas with very high residential property values and lower BMIs where fast food shops are distant and uncommon.
It's just another way to shake down the masses with gotcha capitalism.
(Of course if they do notice they are more likely to cause a disturbance and break things - more things to consider for The Algorithm!)
For restaurants, a "happy hour" might make sense to bring people in off-peak. But trying to charge more during peak hours only works if I can get my meal faster because all the price sensitive customers are gone. Maybe I don't eat enough fast food at peak hours, but that's not a pain point for me.
https://apnews.com/article/wendys-burger-pricing-ef75fa9214b...
More discussion earlier over here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39514464
I'm going to beat the rush and stop eating there now.
Maybe there ought to be regulation and enforcement of price gouging. Price gouging is legal at all times including during emergencies and disasters in 12 states specifically: Alaska, Arizona, Delaware, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Washington, Wyoming. Libertarian paradise!
There's possibly a niche opening up for actually-cheap convenience food, but I don't know how good a business that would be.
Lately I've been simply eating jimmy dean breakfast sandwiches pretty much every meal, they're tasty, and 1 sandwich per meal fills me up, so I get like 4 days worth of meals for $10. (I had gastric sleeve surgery, so I fill up kinda easier than I used to). Not sure how healthy, but convenience -- it's 60 seconds in the microwave.
I'm currently going through a separation so I'm definitely not having the energy to cook anything, plus I'm moving into a motel temporarily until I can get a lease, which only has fridge/microwave.
Maybe in cost relative to local median income ($10 is about 1/11 of a one day share of US median personal income), but definitely not 10 actual USD or the equivalent in straight currency conversion. Proof: people actually live and do physically-demanding jobs with in much of the developing world, with wages which your statement would make impossible because every single person doing it would be dead of starvation within a few months.
They would be better served in running a tight operation. Their restaurants are mostly tired old buildings, but sure, let's throw in surge pricing. It's so short sighted and stupid.