Tag Archives: Food

September 30, 2016 · 8:54 am

Squashed

It’s Foodie Friday, and this week, boys and girls, I’m not having any fun. I’m experiencing feelings I haven’t had since I found out about the Santa thing many years ago. I’m sorry to end your week on a down note, but I found something out that I need to share. It is, of course, helpful to those of us in business, but it’s really a bummer.

English: A slice of homemade Thanksgiving pump...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

You know those cans of pumpkin you use to make pumpkin pie this time of year? That orange goo that turns into warm spice wonderfulness? It turns out that it’s not pumpkin. Nope. It’s squash. In fact, it’s multiple kinds of squash (Butternut, Hubbard, and others) blended together and labeled “pumpkin. The Libby’s people actually have their own variety to replace actual pumpkin, which apparently is too watery and stringy when canned.

I’m sorry if I just ruined Thanksgiving for you. But it points to a broader issue, which is that of transparency. The can says “pumpkin.” I suppose not many folks are lining up to make squash pie, but a lot of folks do think they’re paying top dollar for one species of fish and they’re getting another. They also think they’re buying organic when they’re not.

Trust is among the most important things we try to develop wth our customer base. Once we violate that trust, it’s almost impossible to get it back, and consumers have enough choices that they can move on to someone more trustworthy pretty easily. When you’re pushing pumpkin pie that turns out to be squash, Boston Cream isn’t that far behind. Oh wait – that’s not a pie at all – it’s a cake, technically. OK, apple then.

Don’t serve squash and call it pumpkin, no matter what it is you’re selling. Please?

Leave a comment

Filed under food, Huh?, Reality checks

Tagged as , , , , ,

September 23, 2016 · 11:15 am

Following The Competition

This Foodie Friday I’d like us to think about something you’ve probably seen happen in your town. A restaurant will offer a dish that becomes insanely popular and suddenly everyone is offering their take on it. Cronuts, dishes with foams instead of sauces, or even stuffed burgers (Juicy Lucy’s) are examples. It’s not just restaurants either. One soda brand goes “clear” and suddenly everyone has a “clear” or “crystal” or something similar. The supermarket is stuffed to the gills with innovative products and the several follow-ons produced by competitors.

What does this show us? That businesses pay attention to their competition and are tracking what the other guy is doing. That’s good and important. After all, listening is a fundamental skill. Listening, however, isn’t necessarily reacting. Tracking isn’t following.

It’s not just in the food business. When Ecco had huge success with their hip spikeless golf shoes, suddenly every shoe company had a version. Of course, what the other guys missed was Ecco’s fashion sense, and some of the products were as bad as just wearing tennis shoes to play golf. Microsoft wasted a lot of time and money following Apple everywhere and producing their own versions of Apple products. Still using your Zune?

If you’re going to do your version of a competitor’s product, the impetus for that should be your customers’ expressions of need and not some knee-jerk reaction to what the competitor is doing. First, you might not understand how well the product is selling for the competition. Second, you don’t know what their costs are to produce the dish. Third, even if you do know the previously mentioned data points, you might produce an inferior version which damages your reputation and enhances that of the competition. Finally, and most importantly, follow your customers. Are they defecting to some other brand? Why? Is it to the new product or because you’ve taken them for granted in your haste to follow the other guy rather than them?

Paying attention to what the competition is doing is important but following them can be fatal. Follow your customers, not your competitors.

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, food

Tagged as , , , , , ,

September 16, 2016 · 12:00 pm

When Is A McDonald’s Not A McDonald’s?

It’s Foodie Friday and our Fun this week is an issue that concerns every brand. It comes to us from the good folks at McDonald’s (they seem to be Foodie Friday Fun regulars, don’t they?). According to an article in LeFigaro (h/t Eater), McDonald’s has opened a McDonald’s in Paris under the McCafe name that doesn’t serve burgers or fries. No McNuggets either. In fact, all it will serve is club sandwiches, salads, soup, and other typical cafe food. You know – the sort of stuff that’s sold by hundreds of other Parisian places which are really French and not an American company’s version of French. Yes, McCafes are nothing new but the lack of classic McDonald’s fare is.

Logo of McCafé (McDonald's).

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I’ve written before about how McDonald’s is trying to get beyond the burger/shake/fries branding and into everything from kale salads to rice bowls. This isn’t about finding a way to be successful in France either. MickeyD’s already has 1,300 stores there and France is a hugely profitable country for them. Honestly, I’m not sure what they’re thinking. I can give you a brief anecdote from personal experience, however, which might be helpful.

Several years ago, my daughter was studying in Italy. I went over there to bring her home and we were walking around Rome, my favorite food city in the world. We passed a McDonald’s and my child begged me to go inside. I asked her why, as we were surrounded by wonderful unique trattorias, ristorantes and tavernas and she wanted something that she could find everywhere once we got home. That was precisely the reason – she wanted to feel, just for a few minutes, as if she was home and not in Italy. By turning the all-American McDonald’s experience into something French, they just might be negating one reason people like to go.

The more obvious issue for any of us is what our brands stand for. It’s one thing to open a different type of restaurant under a different name,as countless brands have done with many line extensions. It’s quite another to change the meaning of the brand by changing the core product. I’m not a fan of that and think it should be avoided at all costs.

When you think of McDonald’s, you probably think of Golden Arches, Ronald McDonald, Big Macs, and fries. When you slap the McCafe name on a place that contains none of those things, you dilute the brand. Diluting a brand in its second-most profitable market is, well, not smart. I’m not loving it. You?

Leave a comment

Filed under food, Huh?

Tagged as , , , , , ,